Chapter 7: God's Sovereignty Antecedent to Christ's Death

First then, the habitude of God towards man, antecedent to all fore-sight of the death of Christ, is an act of supreme sovereignty, and dominion, appointing them, by means suited to the manifestation of his glorious properties, according to his infinitely wise, and free disposal, to eternal life, and salvation, for the praise of his glorious grace.

That this salvation was never but one, or of one kind, consisting in the same kind of happiness, in reference to God's appointment, needs not much proving. To think that God appointed one kind of condition for man if he had continued in innocency, and another upon his recovery from the fall; is to think, that his prescience is but conjectural, and his will alterable.

In this instant then, we suppose no kind of affection in God, properly so called: no changeable resolution, no inclination, and propensity of nature, to the good of the creature in general, no frame of being angry, with only a not-averseness to the laying down of his anger, &c. All which, and the like are derogatory to the infinite perfection of God.

Nor yet any act of pitying, and pardoning mercy, much less any quiting, or cleering of sinners, whereby they should be justified from eternity; the permission of sin itself in the purpose of it, being not presupposed, but included in this habitude of God's will towards man, to make it complete.

Neither any absolute intention of doing good to man, without respect to Christ, and his merits, they refering to the good to be done, not to his appointment; for by them is this purpose of his to be accomplished.

Nor lastly, does it contain any actual relaxation, suspension, or abrogation of that law and its penalties, by which it is his will the creature shall be regulated, in reference to the persons concerning whom this act of his will is: they standing indeed, in that relation thereunto, as in the season of their existence, their several conditions expose them to, by vertue of the first constitution of that law.

But it is such an act of his will, as in the Scripture is termed [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] (Acts 2:23; Romans 8:29; 1 Peter 1:20), [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] (Romans 8:28; 9; 11; Ephesians 3:11), [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] (Matthew 11:26; Ephesians 1:5; 2 Thessalonians 1:11; Luke 12:32), [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] (Ephesians 1:11), [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] (2 Timothy 2:19), [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] (Ephesians 1:5, 11; Romans 8:29), ordination, or appointment to life (Acts 13:48; 1 Thessalonians 5:5, 9). All which, and divers other expressions, point at the same thing.

Divines commonly in one word call it his decree of election, and sometimes according to Scripture, election itself (Ephesians 1:4). Neither does the Word hold out any habitude of God towards man, antecedaneous to all efficiency of the death of Christ, but only this: I speak of them only in this whole DISCOURSE for whom he died.

That this is an act of sovereignty, or supreme dominion, and not of mercy (properly so called) has been by others abundantly proved. And this I place as the Causa[〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] of the satisfaction of Christ, and the whole dispensation of making out love to us, through various acts of mercy.

This in the Scripture is called the love of God (Romans 9:13), and is set out as the most intense love, that ever he bears to any of his creatures (John 3:16; Romans 5:8; 1 John 4:9), being indeed as properly love, as love can be assigned to God. His love is but an act of his will, whereby, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. And in respect of effects, (in which respect, chiefly affections are ascribed to God) it has the most eminent possible. Now this being discriminating, can no way be reconciled with the common affection before disproved.

For the order, and series of the purposes of God, as most natural for our apprehension, and agreeable to his own infinite wisdom, tending to the completing of this love, in all its issues, and fruits, as it is more curious (perhaps) in the framing, than necessary to be known, so certainly, it would be too long and intricate a work for me to discuss at present, in reference to this intendment. Only in general, this must be granted, that all the thoughts of God, concerning the way of accomplishing this act of his will, must be subordinate hereunto, as comprising the end, and co-ordinate among themselves, as being concerning the means.

In particular, the constitution, or appointment of the Covenant of free grace, for the recovery, and bringing home to God of fallen man, has immediate dependance thereon, I mean in that way of dependance, which their order gives to them. I cannot assent to what Mr. Baxter has asserted in this matter (Thess. 14. Expl. p. 90): the satisfaction of Christ (says he) to the law, goes before the new covenant, though not in regard of its payment (which was in the fulness of time) yet in undertaking, acceptance, and efficacy; there could be no treating on new terms, until the old obligation was satisfied, and suspended.

Had he attempted the proof of this assertion, perhaps he would have found it a more difficult undertaking, than barely to affirm it. Some few REASONS to the contrary, that present themselves, I shall briefly set down.

1 Christ himself with his whole satisfaction, and merit, is included in the covenant: therefore his satisfaction is not antecedent to the COVENANT. The first appears, in that all promises of pardoning mercy are in, and of this new covenant (Hebrews 8:10, 12); but now, in them, as the foundation of that mercy, is Christ himself with his SATISFACTION comprised (Genesis 3:15; Isaiah 9:6, 7).

2 He, who in all that he is, as made to us, was the Mediator of the new covenant, and whose merit, and satisfaction in all that they are, are appointed for the procuring the mercies of the NEW COVENANT, his satisfaction is not antecedent to the covenant (Hebrews 7:22; chap. 8:6, &c.).

3 The constitution of the new covenant, as it is in the purpose of God, is the rise, and fountain of giving Christ with his satisfaction for us. It is in the purpose of God to save us through faith by pardoning mercy: in the pursute of that design, and for the praise of that glorious grace, is Christ given (John 3:16; Romans 8:32). Or thus:

If the designation of that way of life, and salvation, which is administred by the Gospel, be antecedent to the satisfaction of Christ, then the satisfaction of Christ is not antecedent to the New Covenant: for nothing can be before, and after the same thing. Understand the designation of the way of life, and the satisfaction of Christ, in the same order of decree, or execution. Now the supposal is manifest: the satisfaction of Christ being appointed as the means of accomplishing that way of life.

If Mr. Baxter intendeth those latter words (There could be no treating on new terms, before the OLD OBLIGATION was satisfied, or suspended) as a proof of his former assertion, he will fail in his intendment, as I supose.

1 Treating on new terms, denotes either consilium in eundi foederis, or exequendi: if the first, it is nothing but the purpose of God to save his Elect by pardoning mercy, for the praise of his glorious grace: this is wholly antecedent to any efficiency of the death, and satisfaction of Christ, as being of mere, and absolute grace (Jeremiah 31:3; Habakkuk 8:7, 8).

If the latter be intended, or the actual taking of sinners into covenant, by working an acceptance of it upon their spirits, and obedience to the condition of it, in their hearts, then though the satisfaction of Christ be antecedent here to, yet it is not from there, antecedent to the new Covenant: for the new Covenant, and taking into covenant, are distinct.

This then being assigned to God after our manner of apprehension, the next enquiry is into the state, and condition of those persons, who are the peculiar object of the act of God's will before described, in reference thereunto, antecedaneous to all consideration of the death of Christ, and all efficacy thereof.

The Scripture speaking of them in this condition, says, That they are beloved (Romans 9:13; Romans 11:28), elected (Ephesians 1:4), ordained to eternal life (Acts 13:48; 2 Thessalonians 2:13). Whether only the eternal actings of the will of God towards them, or also their own change, either actual in respect of real state, and condition; or relative in reference to the purpose of God, is not certainly evident. Hereunto then, I propose these two things:

1 By the eternal love, purpose, and act of God's will towards them that shall be saved, (who are so from there) they are not actually changed from that condition which is common to them, with all the sons of men after the fall.

2 By virtue of that love alone, they have not so much as personal right to any of those things which are the proper effects of that love, and which it produceth in due season, beseemingly to the wisdom, and justice of God.

Either of these assertions shall be briefly proved.

For the first, it is manifest:

1 From that act of God's will, which to this love is contradistinct: what change is wrought in the loved, or elected, by the purpose of God according to election; an answerable change must be wrought in the hated, and appointed to condemnation, by the decree of reprobation: now that this should really alter the condition of men, and actually dispose them under the consequences of that purpose, cannot be granted.

2 Analogy from other eternal purposes of God, gives a demonstration hereof. The eternal purposes of the divine will, for the creation of the world out of nothing; left that nothing, as very nothing as ever, until an act of almighty power gave (in the beginning) existence, and being to the things, that are seen. Things have their certain fructurition, not instant actual existence from the eternal purposes of God, concerning them.

3 The Scripture plainly placeth all men in the same state and condition before conversion, and reconciliation. We have proved, that Jews, and Gentiles are all under sin (Romans 3:9, 10). So every mouth is stopped, and all the world is become guilty before God (verse 19), all being by nature, children of wrath (Ephesians 2:3). The condition of all in unregeneracy, is really one, and the same. Those who think it is a mistaken apprehension in the Elect to think so, are certainly too much mistaken in that apprehension. He that believeth not the Son, the wrath of God abideth on him (John 3:36). If the mis-apprehension be, as they say it is, unbelief, it leaves them, in whom it is, under the wrath of God.

He that would see this further cleared, and confirmed, may consult my treatise of Redemption, Lib. 3. Cap. 8. where it is purposely, and expressly handled at large.

Hence Mr. Baxter may have some directions how to dispose of that censure concerning me, which yet he is pleased to say, that he suspendeth, page 158; namely, that I should affirm justification to be nothing but the manifestation of eternal love, which I have more, than in one place, or two, expressly opposed. That any one should but here, and there consult a few lines, or leaves of my treatise, I no way blame: in such things we all use our liberty: but that upon so slight a view, as cannot possibly represent the frame, structure, and coherence of my judgment in any particular, to undertake a confutation, and censure of it, cannot well be done without some regret to candid ingenuity.

For the second assertion laid down, which goes something farther, than the former, it is easily deduced from the same principles therewithal: I shall therefore add only one argument for the confirmation thereof.

God having appointed that his eternal love in the fruits thereof, should be no otherwise communicated but only in, and by Christ, all right thereunto, must of necessity be of his procurement, and purchasing. Yes, the end of the mediation of the Lord Jesus, is, to give right, title, and possession in their several order, and seasons to, and in all the fruits, issues, and tendencies of that love, to them whose Mediator he is appointed to be.

Thus far then, all is seated in the bosom of the Almighty. All differencing acts of grace flowing from hence, being to be made out as seems good to him in his infinite wise sovereignty; from where alone is the disposal of all these things, as to that order which may most conduce to his glory: and this also writes vanity upon the objection (insisted on by Mr. Baxter, page 157.) that when we have a right, we must presently have a possession: all these things being to be moderated according to his free sovereign disposal.

And this concerneth the first instant proposed.