Sermon 14

2 Peter 1:10. Therefore the rather, Brethren, Give all diligence to make your Calling and Election sure.

The last doctrine I drew from these words was this, that Christians should put forth a great deal of diligence to make this sure to their souls, that they are eternally elected by God to life and glory. In the prosecution of which, I have gone over some queries. There are four difficulties or queries I am further to insist upon in treating of this point. As namely,

First, whether this election be universal, or no?

Secondly, whether a man that is once elected by God to salvation, may come to be damned, yes, or no?

Thirdly, whether God, in electing a man to life and glory, does it out of any foresight of faith, or any other grace he sees in man?

And fourthly, whether this doctrine of election, that God in his own counsel has determined who shall be damned, and who saved, does not take men off from any endeavors after their own salvation, to make them desperate, and neglect the use of means — that they shall say, if I shall be damned, I shall be damned; and if saved, I shall be saved, let me live as I please — whether this doctrine will favor this desperate conclusion, yes, or no?

First, whether election be universal, or no? This is what the Arminians and Papists do mightily drive at. And here they lay down this conclusion, which they make unquestionable: that there is such a thing as a certain universal election of God, without limitation or restraint of persons, whereby God did determine to save all mankind by Christ, who were fallen in Adam. This opinion was first drawn from Origen, who held that all creatures should be saved. And the Papists and Arminians, mincing the matter to make it a little more plausible than he did, they say that God in his purpose did intend to save all mankind by Jesus Christ; but man falling away, and walking contrary to their principles, the defect lies in them, that they are not saved. And this divines call universal redemption.

Now against this, I shall lay down several Scriptures and then take off the objections that seem to strengthen this opinion.

First, for Scripture. In the Epistle of Jude (verse 3) you read of some that were ordained of old to condemnation. Therefore sure all could not be saved. In (1 Thessalonians 5:9), some men are appointed to wrath, but we to obtain salvation through Jesus Christ. Therefore all men could not be within the purpose of God's first intention to save. In (Matthew 22:14), many are called, but few are chosen. So in (Romans 11:7), the Jews did not obtain what they sought for, but the elect obtained it, and the rest were hardened. In (2 Timothy 2:20), there are vessels of honor, and vessels of dishonor. The Scripture makes it a discriminating act in God, that some he chose to life; and others from eternity in his counsel he chose to wrath and condemnation. And these Scriptures will fully overthrow this opinion. And indeed the very word choosing confutes it, which intimates a taking of some, with an overlooking of others.

But now let us view a little the arguments of [reconstructed: Scriptures] they abuse, to strengthen this unsound opinion of theirs [illegible].

One is (1 Corinthians 15:22): As in Adam all died, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. Now, say they, every man did die in Adam; every mother's child by Adam's fall became subject to death. Even so, in Christ shall every man be made alive; the Lord did intend that every man should have benefit by Jesus Christ.

Now to take off this, I shall answer it by showing you the true intent and scope of this Scripture. This universal phrase of making alive has not reference to the saving of the soul, but to the resurrection of the body. And so the sense is this: that as in Adam, by virtue of his sin, every man came to die a natural death, so in Christ shall all be made alive — that is, by Christ's power shall every man rise from the dead. And if you ask how I make that appear to be the intent of the text, I answer: the words themselves will make it plain. In Verse 11 it is said, By man came death, by man also came the resurrection from the dead — that is, as by that man Adam came death, so by that man Christ shall come the resurrection from the dead. For as in Adam all died, etc., so that here you see, this is brought in as a proof of the 21st verse, intimating that this being made alive has no reference to the life of the soul, but only to the resurrection of the body. That as Adam by his sin brought death to all men, so Christ by his power shall raise all men from the dead, every man in his own order. However, should this be granted, that this making alive should have reference to the life of the soul, it would bear no more but this: that all that are damned are damned as in Adam's loins; and all that are saved shall be saved as in the loins of Jesus Christ. And so this makes nothing at all to prove what they call universal election.

Another Scripture, undeniable they think, is (Romans 11:32), where it is said, God has concluded all men under unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. Now say they, if God did do an act to make men see their unbelief, and did intend by this action to have mercy upon all, then God in his counsel intended to save all.

Now to this, that he might have mercy upon all, I answer: this phrase "all" is not to be taken in an unlimited sense. That God shut up all men in unbelief — that is, God made all believers see their own misery — that he might have mercy on all them that believe. And if you ask how I prove this to be the meaning of the text, I answer: the Scripture makes it clear in (Galatians 3:22): The Scripture has concluded all men under sin. The very words quoted above. But what is the limitation? Shall all men be saved? No, for mark the next words: The Scripture has concluded all men under sin, that the faith of Jesus Christ should be given to them that believe. Now, though Paul does not say thus to the Romans, yet the words being the same, the restriction holds good in both places. So that it is clear, that he might save all, or have mercy upon all, is not meant all universally; but all, with the limitation of Paul here — all them that believe. Again,

Another objection, or Scripture, they abuse is, 1 Timothy 2:4: Who will have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth. This text Origen does grossly abuse, holding that it is the intention and will of God that all men should be saved. Now, to take off this objection, we must first distinguish here of God's will, and then of this phrase, All. Who will have all men to be saved.

First, of God's will; and the schoolmen give this distinction about it. That there is a will of God's good pleasure; and there is God's signifying will.

Now the will of God's good pleasure is that real purpose in God to save a man. And there is no man that in this sense God wills to be saved, but he must be saved; but in this sense God wills not all men to be saved.

But secondly, there is God's significative will, that is, whereby in Scriptures God tenders salvation to every man that will lay hold upon Jesus Christ. And so God's signifying will excludes no man from salvation; but the ministers, if they preach to ten thousand people, they must tender Christ universally to all, because they know not which of them are elect, and which reprobate; which of them shall be saved, and which damned. This is God's signifying will, and though God by this will tells you what ministers must do, to tender Christ and salvation to all; yet this does no way follow, that the determinate will of God's good pleasure is involved under this, as if all men should be saved. Perkins in his writings has this distinction of it: that there is God's absolute will, and so he wills not all men to be saved; and God's conditional will, that in case every man did believe, they should be saved; for God envies no man's salvation; there is grace enough in God, to save every man in the world.

But secondly, there may be a more distinct answer given to this place. God will have all men to be saved. All is taken sometimes in a distributive sense, and sometimes in a collective sense. In a distributive sense, for every man under heaven; and so God wills not all men to be saved. But secondly, in a collective sense; for all sorts and degrees of men, and so God intends to save all; that is, some of all sorts, and of all degrees of men in the world. And this appears if you mark the context. He will have all men to be saved, that is, some of all sorts. Some kings, some great men, some rich, and some poor, some princes, and some beggars. And therefore the Apostle bids them pray for all men. Pray, says he, for kings and for them in authority: for God will have all men to be saved. As much as if he should say, pray for kings, because God of his grace may save kings, as well as poorer men, that have less encumbrances, and less employments in the world, and less withdrawings in their own soul, than they have. God will save all: salvation shall come to all sorts of men, and therefore you may lawfully pray for them. And so Calvin judiciously expounds this place; that God will have all sorts of men to obtain salvation by Jesus Christ: but it is not to be extended universally, as if every individual man and woman should be saved. 3. These words are to be taken with those that follow after, God will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now that God will be willing to save those that come to the knowledge of the truth is unquestionable: all that repent (Acts 17:30), all opposition to the time of the Old Testament (Romans 16:25).

Now, is this true, that election is not universal; but that some men are elected, and others reprobated? Then, to wrap up this query in a short use; this should teach you all, who are in the land of the living, not to deceive yourselves. Lull not yourselves asleep in security, for it may be, you may be in God's counsel to save, it may be not. Perhaps you may be in God's thoughts for salvation, perhaps you may be in his counsel for damnation; and this should put you upon the work my text calls upon you for, to endeavor to make your calling and election sure.

2. A second [reconstructed: Query] is this, Whether may one that is an elect man, fall away from his election, and come to be a damned man, or no? This the Protestant divines against the Arminians and Papists have had large controversies about, but I will not handle it in a controversial way; only, as it best becomes a pulpit, show you those positive Scriptures and reasons that may clear the truth, and then answer the strongest objections they produce to the contrary.

Whether may a man that is elected fall away, and afterward perish? To this I answer: No. A man that is once elected by God can never perish. And this I shall give Scripture, and reason to plead for it. Matthew 24:24: Christ tells us of error, that it came in so easily, that if it were possible, it would deceive the elect. Intimating, that it is impossible so to seduce the elect, as to make them finally fall away. So, John 6:37: All that the Father has given me, shall come to me: that is, all that God the Father has decreed to save by Christ, shall come to Christ. Verse 39: This is the Father's will, that has sent me, that of all that he has given me, I should lose none. This is the Father's will, and commission to Christ, that of all those that by his decree he had given to Christ to save by redemption, he should lose none. And says Christ, I have lost nothing. So John 10:28-29: I give to my sheep eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any man take them out of my hands; my Father that gave them me, is greater than all, and no man shall pluck them out of my Father's hands. By his Father's hands, he means his decree; God by his decree intended to save so many, and Christ to vindicate his Father, tells us, that so many as God the Father had decreed to salvation, neither man nor Devil should prevail to pluck them out of his Father's hand. So Romans 11:1: God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew. That is, whom God did predestinate, he casts none of them away, none of them shall perish. Many more Scriptures I might multiply, to show, that a man once elected, can never perish; as 2 Timothy 2:19, 1 Corinthians 18:9, 2 Thessalonians 3:3. But I would name reasons as well as Scriptures.

First, if election were changeable, then God must be changeable; which to think, there is nothing more absurd. If God's decree be changeable, God's essence and nature were so also; election being nothing else, but God himself [reconstructed: choosing]: for every thing in God, is God. And this the Scripture tells us, is far from him; for there is no variableness or shadow of change in God (James 1:17; Isaiah 46:10; Malachi 3:6).

Secondly, if the elect could perish, then Jesus Christ should be very unfaithful to his father, because God the father has given this charge to Christ, that whoever he elected, Christ should preserve them safe, to bring them to heaven. Now should not this be accomplished, Christ would be unfaithful to his father. John 6:39: This is the father's will, which has sent me into the world, that of all that he has given me, I should lose nothing, but that I should raise them up at the last day. This is the will of God, to save many by Christ. Now, should not this be made good, Christ must needs be unfaithful to the commission of his father.

Thirdly, should this be true, then Paul's golden chain should be broken (Romans 8:30). Whom he did predestinate, them he calls; whom he calls, them he justifies; whom he justifies, them he glorifies. Now, should this chain break, that whom he elects, them he calls, whom he calls, them he justifies, and there cease (as the Papists hold) and men be after damned, then the great and main links would be lost, that whom he justifies, them he glorifies, and so bring an absurdity upon the Scripture thereby.

Now to answer some texts of Scripture they abuse, (which at first view you would think very plausible) to maintain, that a man may be an elect man, and brought into Christ, yet afterward damned. The first is, John 6:70: Have not I chosen twelve, and one of them is a Devil? Now say they, there were twelve chosen, or elected, and one of them is a devil, did perish; intimating, that men may be elected, yet perish for all this. To which I answer.

That there is a double electing. First, a choosing to some peculiar office. Secondly, there is an electing to grace, life, and glory. Now, when Christ says, Have I not chosen you twelve? it is meant of his choosing of them to an office, to the place of an Apostle, to be his disciples. Now it is true, that a man may be chosen to some peculiar office in the Church of God, and yet be a perishing and damned man; but this phrase has no relation to the decree of God from eternity, only to a temporal electing of twelve men to a temporal office, to the office of an Apostle.

Another Scripture they abuse is Exodus 32:32. It was Moses' prayer, If you will not (says Moses to God) forgive their sins, then blot my name out of the book of life. Now, say they, the book of life is God's election: and here Moses prayed, that God would blot his name out of the book of life. Intimating, say they, a man may be elected and written in that book, and yet afterward blotted out and perish.

To which I answer. That this prayer of Moses is only a wish or supposition, as Paul's was, when he wished he were accursed from Christ, for his kindred in the flesh. Now a man may suppose mountains of gold, and suppose things that never were, nor never shall be in being: bare suppositions put nothing in being. So here, that Moses makes a supposition in a pathetic prayer, this does no way argue, as if his name could be blotted out of the book of life.

Secondly, Rivet expounds it thus, that there is a double book of life. The book of life being sometimes taken for the eternal counsel and decree of God, as in Philippians 4:3; sometimes for the special providence of God over men, in preserving them among the living. So we read in Psalm 139, In your book, says David, were all my members written: meaning, not in the book of God's decree, but only in the book of his providence, that all the members of David's body, they were all under the providence of God, that none could hurt him. And so Rivet, with others, think that by the book of life here is meant, that God would blot out Moses from the book of his special protection and let him die as other men, rather than this evil should come upon the people of Israel. That is: Destroy my name from among men, and do not protect me any longer.

Again, they object that in Psalm 69:28, it is said, Let them be blotted out of the book of life. Now, say they, that is God's election, and to be blotted out, implies, that a man may be elected, and yet perish.

To this I answer, as formerly, that the book of life in that place has no reference to the decree of God's election, but only to his book of providence, that God would not protect wicked men, as he does his own people, in a way of providence. And other phrases in Scripture will somewhat favor this interpretation. As Ezekiel 13:9: They shall not be written in the writings of the house of Israel. What's that? That is, let them not any more be thought Israelites, nor numbered among the people. And Ainsworth, I remember, compares Psalm 69:19 with this place in Ezekiel 13:9, and he makes the sense to be one and the same; that to be blotted out of the book of life, is nothing else than to be out of God's protection; to be blotted out of the catalogue of the living, and have one's life in danger to be brought to death. And this wish David wished for those wicked men.

But then they object further from Revelation 22:19: If any man shall take away from the words of this book, God shall take away his part in the book of life. Here, say they, by book of life is unquestionably meant God's decree; and the Scripture says, they that take any thing from this book, God will blot him out of the book of life, and will undoubtedly damn him.

To which I answer. I confess in this place the book of life is taken for God's decree; and that a man may be said to be blotted out of this book, and yet this no way follows, that a man elected may be damned. And here let me give you Augustine's words upon the place, which is a very clear and satisfactory answer. That a man may be said to be blotted out of the book of life in two regards: First, it is equivalent to this phrase, that this name shall never be written in the book of life. And you have often such phrases in Scripture. As it is said in Matthew, He that does evil himself, and teaches men so to do, he shall be least in the kingdom of heaven. Intimating, not as if he should come to heaven, but that he should not come there at all. To be least there, is never to be there. So here, to be blotted out is equivalent to this, that they were never in.

Secondly, a man's name may be said to be blotted out of the book of life, not as if it were there in deed and in truth, but in their own opinion; they thought they were elected, and thought their names were written there, they had strong conceits of this. And though they are now deluded, and mistaken, yet God will make them know one day, when they are in hell, that their names are blotted out of the book of life.

Another Scripture they abuse is, 1 Corinthians 10:12. Let him that thinks he stands, take heed lest he fall. Now, say they, if it were not possible for a man elected to fall, and fall finally, to what end is this caution of the Apostle? It were a needless caution, were it not possible to come to pass.

To which I answer two things. First, the Apostle does not say, Let him that stands, take heed, etc., but the Apostle says, Let him that thinks he stands, take heed lest he fall. Intimating, that men that think they are elected, and think they are in a good condition, they should take heed, lest they miscarry to all eternity.

Secondly, Take heed lest they fall. This falling here is not meant a falling from grace finally, and falling into hell, and perishing; but the falling here is only a falling into sin, and so an elect man should do. An elect man, though he stand firm in God's decree, yet he should take heed all the days of his life, that he fall not into sin. And if you ask me, how I make that appear, I answer, from the context. This is a conclusion, or caution the Apostle gives upon the enumeration of several instances of the people of God, that in former ages did sin against God. As some that tempted Christ, and fell in one day 23,000. Others that fell to fornication, and provoked him in the Wilderness. With many such sins reckoned up, and the sum of all is this, that seeing they that were God's people fell into sin, and were punished, therefore you that think you stand, and think you are elected, you should take heed you fall not into sin, as they did. And thus I have done with resolving this second query.

Thirdly, whether does God elect any man to life and salvation upon foresight of his faith or good works? Foreseeing that this man will believe, therefore I elect him to salvation; and the other man will not believe, therefore I choose him to damnation. Whether, I say, does God in his eternal decree elect any man to life upon foresight of works. Here the Papists and Arminians join both together in maintaining of this. The reason, say they, why God elects some, and not others, is because God did foresee from eternity that that man would be holy, and would believe in Christ, and therefore God elected him to salvation. These are the hard imputations they lay to God's charge.

And in the resolving of this, I shall answer it in the negative. That God, in electing a certain number of men to life and salvation, did not do it upon the foresight of any good works he saw would be in them; whether faith, repentance, sanctification, or any other grace. Indeed it is true, the Papists many of them do not grossly say that it was foresight of good works in general, but the foresight of faith only, and so the Arminians.

But now, to overthrow this ungrounded opinion, first, I shall lay down Scriptures to confirm this, that God in electing of men to salvation, does not do it upon foresight of good works, and then lay down reasons; and after that take off those objections which seem to darken this truth.

First, for the Scriptures that confirm this, we have Romans 11:5. He has saved a remnant according to the election of grace. Intimating, that the remnant that are saved, it is only of grace, not of foreseen works. So Ephesians 1:5, 11. He has elected us according to the good pleasure of his will. God's mere good will was the impulsive cause of man's election, and nothing in man. So likewise, Romans 9:11. That God's election might stand, not according to our works, but according to the good pleasure of him that called us. So 2 Timothy 1:9. Not of works, but according to his own purpose and grace. Upon his good pleasure, and his good will to mankind, upon that ground election stands.

But now to add some reasons why it cannot be that God should determine in his own counsel, to save man upon the foresight of his works. I shall name four or five.

First, because the inferior privileges that God bestows upon his people, as vocation, and justification, are not for their good works (though they are in actual being) therefore much less is election for good works only foreseen. First, for vocation, 2 Timothy 1:9. We are called, not according to our own works, but according to the purpose of his own grace. And then for justification, we are not justified for works neither. Romans 3:24. We are justified freely by his grace, for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Now, if vocation and justification be not for works, much less is election for works, and for works foreseen, not being actually in us.

Secondly, because then it would follow, that children dying in infancy could not be elected; for the child being in the mother's womb, if it has life, it has a soul, and so must either be saved, or damned. But a child, while it is in the womb, neither acts good or evil. Now if God did elect persons to life upon foresight of works, then children dying in the womb could not be elected; because there are no works God could foresee in them. And then this would be a very uncomfortable doctrine for parents that have children dying young.

Thirdly, then would man have somewhat for which to boast before his God, as if he could lay claim to salvation from him. If God were bound to choose men to salvation upon foresight of good works, then man might say, I thank not God, but I thank my believing, and thank my good works, for these were the motives for which he chose me to glory; and thus would poor man boast against his Maker.

Fourthly, because God has elected the worst of men, when others that have more natural worth and goodness are passed by (1 Corinthians 1:27-28). God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world, etc., and base things of the world, and things that are despised has God chosen, etc. And (Matthew 11:25), I thank you, O Father, that you have hidden these things from the wise and prudent, and have revealed them to babes. Those that had the greatest worldly wisdom, and natural abilities, that most excelled in outward strictness, and moral virtues, are rejected, when those that are but babes in understanding, who many times are the worst for their moralities, are elected; which is a clear demonstration that election is not grounded upon faith, or works foreseen. For then the best had been chosen before the rest.

Fifthly, our works carry no proportion to what God has elected us to; we are elected to eternal glory, but our works are finite, imperfect, no more than our duty, yea not done by our own strength, but by the power of God's grace, and therefore cannot be that which moves God to elect us.

Sixthly, because God does not choose men to life for the sake of Jesus Christ, therefore much less for their works' sake.

It is true, and mistake me not, I confess (and so all divines that are orthodox confess this) that God saves a man for Christ's sake, but God elects not a man for Christ's sake, but merely for his own good pleasure's sake. God in choosing a man to life, has no reference to Christ, as if Christ were the motive. Christ was predestined himself, therefore could not be the cause of our predestination (1 Peter 1:20). We are chosen in him, it is true (Ephesians 1:4), as the common person; God elected Christ first in order, and all believers in him, but it is not for Christ's sake, but according to his own will. As suppose a kingdom to be newly set up, a king is chosen, and his successors to follow after; why then all the succeeding kings are chosen in him that was first elected: so are we chosen in Christ. God does choose a man as freely, as if Christ did never die; and yet God saves none, but for Christ's sake; and this makes election on God's part most free. God does not consider Christ, nor the good works we have, but it is only his own good will that engages him to save some, and neglect others. And thus much for proving this point. There are some objections now that lie in the way which must be removed.

God, say they, does elect men upon the foresight of their good works; and they allege four Scriptures to prove this. James 2:2: Has not God chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith? Now, say they, their laying out their estates for good uses, and so becoming poor, that is the reason why God chooses them, and neglects richer men.

To which I answer: that poor here is only spoken of, as the quality of the persons that are chosen, not as the cause for which they are chosen. And this answer Mr. Perkins gives: that poverty is not the cause why, but the description of the persons that are chosen, that God's decree of election does commonly run among the poorer sort of men, the more to advance his own grace; that man shall not say, election is entailed upon works. For if poverty should be the cause of their election, then all that are poor should be elected, which is false. Again further they object:

2 Thessalonians 2:13: God from the beginning has chosen us to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth. Now say they, sanctification, and faith is made as the channel, through which election must run, and therefore that is the cause or motive why God did elect them. To this we answer.

That it is true, God elects men through sanctification and faith, as the end God aims at in elect persons, not as the motive for which he elects them. And this answer Rivet gives. All elect men shall be sanctified, and all elect men shall believe; though it is not for this sanctification and belief that they are elected. It is not for grace, but to grace they are chosen. This distinction the Scripture gives (1 Peter 1:2): you are elect according to the foreknowledge of God, through sanctification to obedience. Not for, as the motive; but to, as the end.

Again, Titus 1:1, it is called the faith of God's elect. Now, say they, it is called so, because God elects them foreseeing their faith. To which we answer.

That faith is here called the faith of God's elect; not as if God foreseeing faith did elect men, but because all elect men shall believe; because faith is a peculiar privilege belonging only to elect men, therefore it is called their faith.

And then lastly, one Scripture more they allege (2 Timothy 2:20): if any man shall purge himself from sin, he shall be a vessel of honor. Now here, say they, purging, that is, sanctification, and good works, it is made a condition of election, of being a vessel of honor. God makes this condition: if he foresee a man will purge himself, and will live holily, that man shall be elected, shall be a vessel of honor. To which we give this answer: that purging and sanctification is here laid down, not as the cause, but as the sign of their election; not as the cause why men are vessels of honor, but the sign or evidence that they are so. If you are purged, you shall be vessels of honor; that is, if you are sanctified, it is a sign to you that you are elected.