TheTrueBoundsofChristianFreedom

bySamuelBolton

TableofContents

TotheChristianReader

1.TrueChristianFreedom

2.TheMoralLawaRuleofObedience

3.LawandGrace

4.ChastisementsforSin

5.PerformanceofDuty

6.PartialBondage

7.ObediencefortheSakeofReward

8.ObediencetoMen

9.TheApplicationtoBelieversandUnbelievers

TotheChristianReader

Itiswellknownthat,justasGodhascommunicatedmanytruthstoman,so has Satan endeavoured to bring in many errors, his hope being toprejudiceandweakenthereceptionofthetrutheventhoughhefailedtoinducemen to entertain his lies. Indeedhe finds that his best time forsellinghiswares iswhenpedlarsaremostbusy, andwhen, in thebusymarket,menarebuyingtruth.It is thenthatheoffershismerchandise.Tomake itmore vendible he represents it as highly respectable and asspiritualincharacterastruthitself.Forlonghehaswalkedasaprinceofdarkness,butbecause he has lost hope of deceivingmen any longer assuch,henowtransformshimselfintoanangeloflight.Successfulinpastagesasabare-faceddeceiver,heputonamaskwhenmendiscoveredhisreal character, and thus disguised he carried on his designs forgenerations. But the mask is now taken off, and he operates as onewearingtheveryfaceoftruth.

No errors aremore dangerous and destructive than those which reachmen as the teachings of free grace. Poison in the fountain fromwhichtheyspring,theyarepoisoninmen’shearts.Ineednottellhowmanyofthem have been brought before men and received by them. For therecoveryofthosewhohavebeenthuscarriedaway,fortheestablishingofthose who stagger, and for the upbuilding of those who are in somemeasure settled in the truth, the following treatise is, at the request ofmanyfriendswhoheard itpreached,nowprinted.It ispartlydoctrinal,settingforthandconfirmingthetruthcommonlyreceivedbyChristians,andpartlycontroversial,examiningandconfutingthecontraryopinions.

Wehavegivenouropponentsafairtrial,havingbeenwillingtoheartheutmost they could say. Our examination of the questions onwhichwedifferiscomprisedundersixqueries,namely,

1. WhetherourbeingmadefreebyChristfreesusfromthelaw,2.Whether our being made free by Christ delivers us from all

punishmentsorchastisementsforsin,3.Whether it is consistent with Christian freedom to be under

obligationtoperformdutiesbecauseGodhascommandedthem,4.Whether Christ’s freemenmay come into bondage again through

sin,5. Whether it is consistentwithChristian freedom to performduties

outofrespectfortherecompenseofthereward,6. WhetherthefreedomofaChristianfreeshimfromallobedienceto

men.

These will be the main inquiries. Opinions contrary to those hereexpoundedwillbedebatedinafriendlymannerandplainlyconfuted.Mymainaimis toconvincethe judgment,not to irritatetheaffections, lestwhileIseektobehelpfultograce,Imightrenderservicetosin,andwhileIendeavourtoleadmentoholiness,Ishouldstirupmen’scorruptions,andsoruninvain.Ihavesought,therefore,todealwithprinciplesmorethanpersons,andrathertounveilerrorsbymeansofargumentthanbynamingthem.It ismyearnestdesirethatwhat isheremadeobvioustotheeye, theGodof truthwouldmakeevident to theheart,and thatHewould give tomy readers andmyself sound judgment, thatwemay beable to distinguish between things that differ.MayHe guide us in thewaysoffaithandobedience,enableustoserveHimwhilewelive,smileupon uswhenwe die, and after death take us toHimself. This is all Idesireformyself,andtheleastIdesireformyreaders.

April23,1645.

YoursintheserviceofChrist,toadvancefaithandobedience,

SAMUELBOLTON.

1.TrueChristianFreedom

‘IftheSonthereforeshallmakeyoufree,yeshallbefreeindeed’(John8:36).

It is set down as a part of the sufferings ofChrist (Heb. 12. 3) thatHeenduredthecontradictionofsinners.AndamongallthechaptersintheGospel there isnone that setsdown so great apart of the sufferingsofChrist in this respect as this eighth chapter of John. From the twelfthversetotheendofthechapteralmosteveryverseshowshowtheJewssetthe pride of their obstinate and rebelliouswills againstHisDivine andinfinite wisdom. There was nothing that Christ could speak but theirrebelliousheartscavilledatit,andsoughttothwartandcontradictHiminit.YetthereweresomeamongthemthattheWordhadbettereffectsupon. In verse 31 it is recorded that, though there were many tocontradict, yet some were wrought upon, some believed. To those inparticularChristdirectsHimself,bywayofcautionandencouragement,andtells themthat if theycontinued inHisword, theywouldknow thetruth;yea,andthetruthwouldmakethemfree.

Whereupon the Jews answered (not those that believed, as appears byverse37, for the samepersons that thus answered sought to killHim):‘We be Abraham’s seed, and were never in bondage to any man: howsayest thou, Ye shall be made free?’ Christ might have returned thisimpudent cavil upon themby urging them to review their former stateundertheEgyptiansandBabylonians,andtheirpresentconditionundertheRomans;butputtingasidetheirpoliticalbondage.Heprovesthemtobe in spiritual and soul bondage to sin. ‘He that committeth sin is theservantofsin’(v.34);andyou,saidHe,commitsin.

Havingshownthemtheirpresentsinfulcondition,Henextgoesontotellthem what would be their future doom. They must be cast out of thehouse,althoughtheywerenowintheChurchofGod.Astheapostlesays:‘Castoutthebond-womanandherson’.ThisChristprovesbycontrastingthe conditionof a servant andof a son:The servant abidethnot in thehouseforever:but theSonabidethever’ (v.35).YetHedoesnot leave

themhereundertheirsaddoom,butpropoundstothemawaytopreventit,namely,byendeavouringtogetfree.Hethensetsdownthemeansbywhichthisfreedommaybeobtained,andthatisbytheSon.Thoughtheworkisdifficult,yetHethatabidesinthehouseforever,HethatistheSon, can effect it: For if the Son shall make you free, ye shall be freeindeed’.

ThushaveIshownyouhowmytextisrelatedto,anddependsupon,theprecedingwords.Weshallnow lookat the textas it standscomplete initself:‘IftheSonshallmakeyoufree-‘

Herewe observe, first, a supposition - If the Son shallmake you free’;secondly,a consequence -Ye shallbe free indeed’.Giveme leave to setforththistruthinfourparticulars:

First,wehaveabenefitexpressed- freedom: ‘If theSonshallmakeyoufree’.

Secondly, we have the qualities of this freedom - it is a true and realfreedom:‘freeindeed’.

Thirdly,wehavethesubjectsofthisfreedom-believers:‘IftheSonshallmakeyoufree’.

Fourthly, we have the author of it - Christ: ‘If the Son shallmake youfree’.

From what is expressed and what is implied, we can draw fourconclusions:

(1)Thateverymanbynature,andinthestateofnature,isinbondage,

(2)Thatsomearesetfreefromthisbondage,

(3)ThatthosewhoaresetfreearesetfreebyChrist,

(4)ThatsuchasChristsetsfreearefreeindeed.

Idonotproposetodealwithallthesemattersinthisdiscourse:itwillnot

suit my present purpose. Not that the subject of the bondage of menmightnotbeof service,as set incontrastwithspiritual freedom.Muchcan be learned from contraries. Just as something of heaven is to beknownfromtheconsiderationofhell, sosomethingof theexcellencyofspiritualfreedommaybeknownfromtheconsiderationofman’snaturalbondage-abondagetosin,toSatan,andtothelawofGod.Allwhichisauniversal bondage of the soul, a cruel bondage, a willing bondage, abondageoutofwhichwearenotabletoredeemourselvesbyransom,ortodeliverourselvesbyourownpower.

Thedoctrineofman’sbondageweshallnotatpresentexpoundfurther,though Imaymake some application of it later. The four points aboutfreedom, however, on which I shall now speak, I will sum up in onestatementofdoctrine:ThatthereisatrueandrealfreedomwhichChristhas purchased, and into which He has brought all those who are truebelievers.Thisistheteachingofthetext.Otherwisestated,wehaveherethenature,thequality,andthepartsofChristianfreedom.

TheNatureofChristianFreedom

First,weshallconsiderthenatureofthisfreedom.

Therearefourkindsoffreedom-natural,political,sensual,andspiritual.Naturalfreedomisthatwhichisenjoyedbyeverythinginnature,butthisis not the freedom intended in the text. Political freedompertains to aNation,aState,aCommonwealth,aCorporation,anditwasofthisthatthe Jews understood Christ to speak. They were Abraham’s seed, andthereforefree.ButChristdidnotspeakofthis.Again,thereisacorruptandsinfulfreedomwhichweexpressunderthenameofLibertinism.TothistheapostlerefersinGal.5.13: ‘Brethren,yearecalledunto liberty:butusenotlibertyasanoccasiontotheflesh’,thatis,asanoccasiontosin.ItisafearfulthingwhenmenturnthegraceofGodintowantonness.SuchmenarespokenofinthefourthverseoftheEpistleofJude:Thereare certainmen crept inunawares,whowere before of old ordained tothis condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God intolasciviousness ‘. Perhaps they reasoned thus: ‘Let us abound in sinbecauseGodhasaboundedingrace’(Rom.6),whichisfearfulreasoning,not that of a child of God. Of the same sort ofmen, the apostle Peter

speaks (1 Pet. 2. 16): ‘As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke ofmaliciousness’(thatistosay,asapretextoracolourtosin),‘butastheservantsofGod’.Itiseviltosin,todoanyactofmaliciousness,butmuchmore so to cloak or cover it; andmuchmore again to make Christianlibertythecloakofsin:thatismostdamnable.Tomakereligion,tomakethetruthofGod,tomakeChristianlibertysodearlypurchased,acloakorpretexttosin,ortotakeoccasiontosinbyit,isafearfulsin.

But of this Christ does not here speak. This is our bondage, not ourfreedom,asIshallshowlater.

Itisaspiritualandheavenlyfreedomofwhichourtextspeaks,afreedompurchasedbyChrist,revealedintheGospel,andconveyedtothesaintsofGodas the greatdowryofChrist toHisChurchandSpouse.TwogreatthingsChristhasentrustedintothehandsofHisChurch-Christianfaithand Christian liberty. Just as we are to contend earnestly for themaintenance of the faith (Jude 3), so also for the maintenance ofChristianliberty,andthatagainstallwhowouldopposeandundermineit:‘StandfastthereforeinthelibertywherewithChristhathmadeusfree’(Gal. 5. 1).Very like this is the exhortation of the same apostle:Yeareboughtwithaprice:benotyetheservantsofmen’(1Cor.7.23).ButofthisIshallsaymorehereafter.

Ingeneral,then,Isay,thefreedomintowhichChristbringsbelieversisaspiritual, a Divine freedom, a freedom contrasted with their formerbondage. If this is clearly understood it will explain what Christianfreedomreallyis.

TheQualityOfChristianFreedom

Wecomenexttoinquirewhatisthequalityofthisfreedom.Onequalityismentioned in the text; I shall add two more to it. First, it is a realfreedom, not an imaginary or fancied freedom. Too many imaginethemselvestobefreewhoarereallyinbondage.Butthisisnoimaginaryfreedom;itisafreedomindeed,atrueandrealfreedom.WhomtheSonmakesfreearefreeindeed.

Again, it is a universal freedom, a freedom which does not leave us

partially inbondage.Christian liberty frees a believer from all kinds ofpreviousbondage.Butwemustbewareof takinganypartofour libertyforourbondage,orofourbondageforourliberty.Toomanydoso.Wewere,then,inbondagetoSatan,tosin,tothelaw,towrath,todeath,tohell. By this privilege we are freed from all. It is a universal freedom,universal in respect of persons - believers; universal in respect of itsparts.Weare free fromall thatwas,or isanywaypartofourbondage;freefromSatan,fromsin,fromthelaw,asIshallshowlater.

Then,too,itisaconstantfreedom;aChristianisbroughtintoaconditionoffreedom,astateoffreedom,aspreviouslyhewasinastateofbondage.Wherever the Lord’s jubilee is proclaimed and pronounced in a man’ssoul,hewillneverhearagainofareturntobondage.HewillneveragaincomeunderbondagetoSatan,thelaw,oraughtelse.This is impliedbyChristinthewords:Theservantabidethnotinthehouseforever;buttheSon abideth ever’ (John 8. 35). The apostle expresses the same truthunderthefigureofanallegorywhenhesays:‘Abrahamhadtwosons,theone by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman’ (Gal. 4. 22). Here hedistinguishes between thosewho areunder the law, and thosewho areundertheGospel,thechildrenofthebondwomanandthoseof thefree,theheirs of promise and the servants of the law.Theonemust be castout,saysPaul.LikewiseChristspeakshere:Theservantabidesnotinthehouseforever’(theyshallnotinherit),buttheSonabidesinthehouseforever. ’Thesonsshall inherit,shallenjoyaperpetual freedom,andshallneveragainreturntobondage.

TheBranchesofChristianFreedom

Wecomenow to consider the third thing propounded, the branches ofthisChristianfreedom.ButbeforeIspeakofthis.Imustnecessarilytellyou that freedom in general has two branches. First, there is inchoatefreedom,thatis,thefreedomweenjoyduringthedaysofourpilgrimage,freedomingrace-second,consummatefreedom,thatis,thefreedomofourFather’shouse,freedominglory.Weshallspeakchieflyofthefirst-inchoatefreedom.

FreedominitsNegativeAspects

(i)FreedomfromSatan

To beginwith, it is clear that believers are free from Satan. Christ haswrested us and delivered us from Satan’s hands.Wewere prisoners toSatan, in his chains, andChrist has brought us deliverance. This is setdown by way of a parable in the Gospel of Luke: ‘When a strongmanarmed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: butwhen a strongerthanheshallcomeuponhim,andovercomehim,hetakethfromhimallhisarmourwhereinhetrusted,anddividethhisspoils’(ch.11.21-22).Butit is plainly stated in Heb. 2. 14, 15: Christ came into the world ‘thatthroughdeathhemightdestroyhimthathadthepowerofdeath,thatis,thedevil’.ChristfreedusfromthewrathofGod,fromthedevil’spower,by purchase. By a strong hand He delivers us from Satan, just as HedeliveredthechildrenofIsraeloutofEgyptbyastronghand.

(ii)FreedomfromSin

Secondly,wearefreedfromsin,bywhichImeantheguilt,thedefilementandthedominionofsin.Thatnoneofoursinsshallcondemnusorbringwrathuponus,ChristinterposesHimselfbetweenusandwrath,sothatno one shall be able to condemn us: There is therefore now nocondemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus’(Rom. 8. 1). ChristHimselfshallassoonbecalledtoaccountforyoursinasyouyourself.IfyouhaveaninterestinHim,sinshallnevercondemnyou,forChristhasmade satisfaction for it. Those whose standing is in Christ havemadesatisfaction in Christ to all the requirements of God and His law’(Piscator).

ItwouldnotberighteousofGodtorequirepaymentfromChrist,nay,toreceivethefull satisfactionofChrist,and to requireanything fromyou.ThisiswhatGodhasdone:Helaidonhimtheiniquityofusall’(Isa.53.6). This is what Christ has done: He paid God till God said He hadenough.Hewasfullysatisfied,fullycontented:ThisismybelovedSon,inwhomIamwellpleased’(Matt.3.17and12.18),thatis, ‘inwhomIamfullysatisfiedandappeased’.Hencetheapostlewrites:GodwasinChrist,reconcilingtheworlduntoHimself…forhehathmadehimtobesinforus,whoknewnosin;thatwemightbemadetherighteousnessofGodinhim’ (2 Cor. 5. 19-21). God was paying Himself out of the blood,

scourgings, and sufferings of Christ; and in that, Christ made a fullpayment.HenceChrist says: I sendmySpirit, andhewill convince theworld,asofsinsoofrighteousness,becauseIgototheFatherandyeseemenomore’(John16.7-10).Thatis,youshallseeMenomoreafterthisfashion.YoushallneverseeMeagainasasufferer,asasatisfierofGod’sjustice forsin. Ihavecompletedthiswork.IndeedweshouldhaveseenChristagainifHehadnotsatisfiedjustice.IftheguiltofbutoneofthosesinsHe bore had remained onHimunsatisfied for, it would have heldHimunderchainsofdeathandthepowerofthegraveforever.Hecouldneverhaverisen,muchlessascendedandgonetotheFather, ifHehadnotmettheclaimsofjusticetothefull.Forthisreasontheapostlethrowsdownachallenge.HesetsthedeathofChristagainstwhateversin,Satan,justice, and the law can say: ‘Who shall lay anything to the charge ofGod’s elect? It isGod that justifieth.Who is he that condemneth? It isChrist thatdied,yearather, that is risenagain,who isevenat therighthandofGod,whoalsomaketh intercession forus’ (Rom.8.33-34).Hedoes not say,Who shall accuse? but,Who shall condemn? Indeed, wemay have accusers enough - sin, Satan, conscience, and the rest - butnonecancondemn.Theissuesoflifeanddeatharenotintheirhand.Andasnoneofoursinsshallcondemnus,sononeofoursinsshalleverbringus into a state of condemnation again, ever put us under the curse orunderwrathagain.

Likewise,noneofoursinscanbringuponustheconsequencesofDivinewrath. We are freed from all miseries, calamities, afflictions, andpunishments which are the fruits of sin, so far as they have wrath inthem.Ifyoutakeawaythesubstance,theshadowmustneedsdepartalso.Sinisthesubstance,punishmenttheshadowthatattendsitandfollowsit.Takeawaysinandthenthepunishmentsarealsotakenaway.AllGod’sdispensationsareinmercy.

ItisagreedbyallthateternalpunishmentscannevercomeuponanyofthosewhomChristhasfreedfromsin,thosewhomHehasjustified.Fromotherpunishments thathavesomethingofeternalpunishment in them,believersarealsofreed.NothinginthenatureofDivinewrathcantouchthem.

Igrant thatGoddoesafflict thosewhosesinHepardons,butthere isa

greatdealofdifferenceinrespectofthehandfromwhichtheafflictionsproceed, thepersonswhobear theafflictions, the reasons for afflicting,andtheendsthatGodaimsatinsendingtheafflictions,asIshallshowlater.

Itisclearthat,sofarasafflictionsarepartofthecurseforsin,GoddoesnotandcannotafflictHispeopleforsin.NordoesGodafflictHispeopleforsinasifsuchafflictionswerepaymentsorsatisfactionsforsin,andasifGod’sjusticewasnotfullysatisfiedforsinbyChrist;asifChristhadleftsomethingforustobearbywayofsatisfaction.ThePapistssaythis(andtherefore theyperformpenances andpunish themselves) but sodonotwe.

Again, so farasafflictionsare thesole fruitsof sin,Goddoesnotbringthem upon His people, for in this respect they are part of the curse.Afflictions upon wicked men are penal, a part of the curse; there isnothingmedicinal in them; theyare theeffectsofvindictive justiceandnot of Fatherly mercy. But afflictions which come upon the godly aremedicinalinpurpose,andareintendedtocurethemofsin.

Whether, then, we have regard to punishment eternal, spiritual, ortemporal,Christhasfreedthegodlyfromall:frometernalpunishmentasthewrathwhichisduetosin,fromspiritualpunishmentasitisrelatedtoeternal,andfromtemporalasfarasitisrelatedtoboththeothers,andasfarasithasanythingofGod’swrathinit.

GodhasthoughtsofloveinallHedoestoHispeople.ThegroundofHisdealingswithusislove(thoughtheoccasionmaybesin),themannerofHis dealings is love, and the purpose of His dealings is love. He hasregard,inall,toourgoodhere,tomakeuspartakersofHisholiness,andtoourgloryhereafter,tomakeuspartakersofHisglory.

ButitisnotsoinregardtoGod’spunishmentofwickedmen.Neitheristhe ground love, nor the manner love, nor the purpose love. All Hisdealingswiththeminthisrespectarepartsofthecurseandhaveregardto the demerit of their sin. Christ has also freed the believer from thedominion of sin: ‘Sin shall not have dominion over you’ (Rom. 6. 14).Why?Foryearenotunder the law,butunder grace’. Indeed,whilewe

wereunderthelaw,sinhadfulldominion.Ithadnotonlypossessionofus,butdominionoverus.Andthatdominionwasavoluntary,awilling,afreesubjectionandresignationofourselvestothemotionsandservicesofsin. Then we went down stream, wind, and tide. There was both thepowerof lust,andlustful inclinations, tocarryus: thiswasthetide, theotherwasthewind.Butnow,beingundergrace,acovenantofgrace,andbeing interested in Christ and set free by Him, we are freed from thedominionandpowerofsin.

We still have the presence of sin, nay, the stirrings and workings ofcorruptions.Thesemakeus tohavemanya sadheart andwet eye.YetChristhas thus far freedus fromsin; it shallnothavedominion.Theremaybe the turbulence,butnot theprevalenceof sin.Theremaybe thestirrings of corruption. It was said of Carthage that Rome was moretroubledwith itwhenhalfdestroyed thanwhenwhole. So a godlymanmaybemoretroubledwithsinwhenitisconqueredthanwhenitreigned.Sin will still work, but it is checked in its workings. They are ratherworkingsforlifethanfromlife.Theyarenotsuchuncontrolledworkingsas formerly. Sin is under command. Indeed, itmay get advantage, andmayhaveatyrannyinthesoul,butitwillnevermorebesovereign.Isay,itmaygetintothethroneoftheheartandplaythetyrantinthisorthatparticularactofsin,butitshallnevermorebeasakingthere.Itsreignisover;youwillneveryieldavoluntaryobediencetosin.Sinisconquered,thoughitstillhasabeingwithinyou.

Augustinedescribesmanunderfourdifferentconditions.

Beforethelawheneitherfightsnorstrivesagainstsin.Underthelawhefightsbutisovercome.Undergracehefightsandconquers.Butinheavenit is all conquest, and there is no combatmore to all eternity. It isourhappinesshereingracethatthereisaconquest,thoughadailycombat:wefight,butwegetthevictory;sinshallnevermorehavedominionoverus.Thosesins thatwerekingsarenowcaptives inus; sins thatwere inthethronearenowinchains.Whatamercyisthis!Othersareundertheauthoritative commands of every passion, of every lust; every sin hascommandoverthem;notemptationcomesbutitconquers.Asinfulheartstands ready to entertain every sin that comes with power; it is takencaptiveatpleasureandwithpleasure.

But the believer is free from the dominion of sin. In temptation sin isbroken.Thereisnoallowingofsinintheunderstanding.Thesoulisnotwillingtoallowofsinassinunderanyshapeorform.Thereisnoclosingwith it in thewill,noembracingof it in theaffections. Itsworkings arebrokenandwounded.Obelievers,youwillneverbewillingcaptivestosinagain; you may be captives, never subjects; sin may tyrannize, neverreign.Thereignofsindescribesasoulunder thepowerof sinand inastate of sin. But sin rather dies than lives in you. A sicklymanwho ispiningawayissaidrathertobedyingthanliving;toliveimpliesagettingofstrength,andsindoesnotdothis.It is inaconsumptivestate,dyingdaily.

Sinisdeadjudicially;Christhassentencedit.Christhascondemnedsinintheflesh(Rom.8.3).SinmetitsdeathblowinthedeathofChrist.Anditisdyingactually.AswasthecasewiththehouseofSaul,itisdecreasingeveryday.ButnoticethatGodhaschosentoputsintoalingeringdeath,toadeathuponthecross,andthisforthegreaterpunishmentofsin,thatitmightdiegradually.Butalso,itisforthefurtherhumiliationofsaintsthattheymightbeputupontheexerciseofprayerandcastupontheholdoftheirfaith.Itisintendedtoexercisetheirfaithforthedailybreakingofthepowerofsinandcorruptioninthem.

ThusmuchthenuponourdeliverancefromsinbyChrist.

(iii)FreedomfromtheLaw

Christhasfreedusfromthelaw:that isanotherpartofourfreedombyChrist.Wearedeliveredfromthelaw,thatbeingdeadwhereinwewereheld;thatweshouldserveinnewnessofspirit,andnotintheoldnessoftheletter’(Rom.7.6).’Ithroughthelawamdeadtothelaw,thatImightliveuntoGod’(Gal.2.19).‘IfyebeledbytheSpirit,yearenotunderthelaw”(Gal.5.18).Tearenotunderthelaw,butundergrace’(Rom.6.14).ThisthenisanotherpartofourfreedombyChrist:wearefreedfromthelaw.Whatthisisweshallnowconsider.

Wearefreedfromtheceremoniallaw,whichwasayokewhichneitherwenorourfatherswereabletobear(Acts15.10).Yetthisisbutasmallpart

ofourfreedom.

(a)Freedomfromthelawasacovenant.

Wearefreedfromthemoral law:freedfromit, first,asacovenant,sayourdivines.Itwouldsaveagreatdealoftroubletosaywearefreedfromthe lawas that fromwhich lifemightbeexpectedon thecondition thatdueobediencewasrendered.Buttakeit,asdomany,inthesensethatwearefreedfromthelawasacovenant.

The lawmaybe consideredasa ruleandasa covenant.Whenwe readthatthelawisstillinforce,itistobeunderstoodofthelawasarule,notasacovenant.Again,whenwereadthatthelawisabrogated,andthatwearefreedfromthelaw,itistobeunderstoodofthelawasacovenant,notasarule.Butyetinallthisitisnotyetexpressedwhatcovenantitis.Theapostlecallsittheoldcovenant(Heb.8.13)underwhichtheywere,andfromwhichwearefreed.Itcouldnevergiveuslife;itcannotnowinflictdeath on us.We are dead to it, and it is now dead to us.We read inRomans7.1-6:The lawhathdominionoveramanas longashe liveth.For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to herhusbandas longashe liveth;but if thehusbandbedead, she is loosedfromthelawofherhusband.’Amongotherinterpretationswhichmightbesetdown,Ishallsuggest thisoneonly: the lawisyourhusband;youare under subjection to it as you are looking by your subjection to bejustifiedandsaved.Anduntilthelawasacovenantorhusbandisdeadtoyou,andyoutoit(fortheapostlemakesthembothone),youwillneverlookforrighteousnessandlifeinanother.Untilthelawkillsyou,andyouaredeadtoit,youwilllookforrighteousnessandlifethroughobediencetoit.Butwhenoncethelawhaskilledyou,andshowedyouitisdeadtoyouandcandoyounogood,sothatyoucanexpectnothingfromit,thenwillyoulookforlifebyChristalone.

Suchwastheapostle’sowncase.Hewasonceonethatexpected(aswellhemight)asmuchgoodfromthelawandhisobediencetoitasanyman.Sayshe: ‘Iwasalivewithoutthelawonce:butwhenthecommandmentcame, sin revived and I died. And the commandment, which wasordainedtolife,Ifoundtobeuntodeath’(Rom.7.9,10).Thatistosay,Ifoundthatinsteadofsavingmeitkilledme;itgavedeathinsteadoflife.

And again he says: ‘For sin, taking occasion by the commandment,deceived me, and by it slew me’: that is, the law came in wit h anenlightening, convincing, accusing, condemning power, and laidme onmy back, and did clean kill me. I saw I could expect nothing there,nothingfromitasacovenant.

As for the apostle, therefore, the lawwas now dead to him, and couldafford himnothing; likewise was he also dead to the law.He expectednothing from it afterwards. As he tells us later: ’ I through the law amdeadtothe law,thatImight liveuntoGod’(Gal.2.19): that is, the lawhavingnowslainme,Iamforeverdeadtoit.Iexpectnothingfromitasacovenant-allmylifeisinChrist.Ilooknowtolivebyanother.Ithroughthe law, that is, through the convincing, enlightening, condemning,killing power of it, see that it is dead to me and I to it. I can expectnothingfromit,thatis,asacovenantoflifeanddeath.ItisdeadtomeandItoit,andIlookforallfromChrist.

Thusarewefreedfromthelawasacovenant.Ishallspeakmorelargelyof this in the answers to the queries later.Meanwhilewe come to dealwithotherbranchesofourChristian freedom from the law, thenext inorderbeingourfreedomfromthemaledictionsandcursesofthelaw.

(b)Freedomfromthecursesofthelaw

Thelawrequires twothingsof themwhoareunder it:either theymustobeytheprecepts,which is impossiblewiththedegreeofstrictnessandrigidnesswhichthelawrequires(Gal.3);ortheymustbearthepenaltiesofthelaw,whichareinsupportable.Eithertheymustobeythecommandsorsufferthecursesofthelaw,eitherdoGod’swillorsufferGod’swillinforfeituresofsoulandbody.Inthissaddilemmaarethosewhoareunderthelawasacovenant:‘Hethatbelievethnotiscondemnedalready…thewrathofGodabidethonhim’(John3.18,36).Unbelieversmustneedsbeunderthecursesofthelaw.

But believers are freed from the law as a covenant of life and death.Thereforetheyarefreefromthecursesandmaledictionsofthelaw.Thelaw has nothing to do with them as touching their eternal state andcondition. Hence the words of the apostle: There is therefore now no

condemnationtothemwhichareinChristJesus’(Rom.8.1),thatis,tothemwho are not under the law.Were you indeed under the law as acovenant, condemnation would meet you, nothing else butcondemnation.Though the law is not able to save you, yet it is able tocondemn you.Unable to bestow the blessing, yet it can pour the curseuponyou:‘Asmanyasareoftheworksofthelaw’-thatis,thoseunderthelawasacovenant,andthatlookforlifeandjustificationthereby-‘areunderthecurse’(Gal.3.10).Andhecontinueswiththeargument:,Foritiswritten,‘Cursediseveryonethatcontinuethnotinallthingswhicharewritteninthebookofthelawtodothem’.Itisnotpossibleforamantoobeyinallthingswithoutfailinginany;henceheisleftunderthecurse.So that I say, ifyouareunder the law, the law isable tocondemn you,thoughitcannotsaveyou(Rom.8.3).

ButChristhasbroughtfreedomtothoseinHim,freedomfromthecursesofthelaw,andthatbybearingthiscurseforthem,asitiswritten:‘Christhathredeemedus fromthecurseof the law,beingmadeacurse forus’(Gal.3. 13).Theapostlenotonly says thatChristbore thecurse forus,butthatHewasmadeacurseforus,for:‘Itiswritten,Cursediseveryonethathangethona tree’.This isanotherof thebenefitswhich flow fromChrist’swork. The believer is freed from the law as a covenant, and sofrom the curse of the law. The law cannot pass sentence upon him, itcannot condemn him. He is not to be tried in that court. Christ hassatisfiedthelawtothefull.

This privilege belongs not only to the present; it lasts for ever. Eventhoughthebelieverfallsintosin,yetthelawcannotpronouncethecurseonhimbecause,asheisnotunderthelaw,heisfreedfromthecurseofthelaw.Amanisneverafraidofthatobligationwhichisrenderedvoid,the seals torn off, the writing defaced, nay, not only crossed out andcancelledbuttorninpieces.ItisthusthatGodhasdealtwiththelawinthe case of believers, as touching its power to curse them, to sentencethem and condemn. The apostle tells us: He hath blotted out thehandwritingofordinancesthatwasagainstus,whichwascontrarytous,and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross’ (Col. 2. 14). By ‘thehandwriting of ordinances’ I conceive is notmeant the ceremonial lawalone, but themoral lawalso, so far as itwas againstus andboundus

overtothecurse.

Wecanhereobservethesuccessivestepswhichtheapostlesetsout.‘Hehathblottedout.’Butlestthisshouldnotbeenough,lestanyshouldsay.It isnotsoblottedout,butitmayberead,theapostleadds.Hetookitoutoftheway.Butlesteventhisshouldnotbeenough,lestsomeshouldsay. Yea, but it will be found again and set against us afresh, he adds,‘nailingittohiscross’.Hehastornittopieces,nevertobeputtogetheragainforever.Itcanneverbethatthelawhasaclaimagainstbelieversonaccountoftheirsins.Indeeditbringsinblackbills,strongindictmentsagainstsuchasareunderit;butitshallneverhaveanythingtoproduceagainstthosewhohaveaninterestinChrist.Imaysayofbelievers,astheapostledoesinanothersense, ‘Againstsuchthereisnolaw’.Asthereisnolawtojustifythem,sothereisnolawtocondemnthem.

Fivereasonswhythelawcannotcondemnthebeliever

Allthistheapostleputsplainly:‘Whoishethatcondemneth?itisChristthatdied’(Rom.8.34).HesetsthedeathofChristagainstallthechargesthat can be brought. It is evident that the court of the law cannotcondemnthebeliever:

(1) Because that court is itself condemned; its curses, judgments, andsentencesaremade invalid.Asmen that are condemnedhavea tonguebutnovoice, so the law in thiscasehasstilla tongue toaccuse,butnopowertocondemn.Itcannotfastencondemnationonthebeliever.

(2)Becausehe is not under it as a court.He is not under the law as acovenantoflifeanddeath.AsheisinChrist,heisunderthecovenantofgrace.

(3) Because he is not subject to its condemnation. He is under itsguidance,butnotunderitscurses,underitsprecepts(thoughnotonthelegalconditionof‘Dothisandlive’),butnotunderitspenalties.

(4)BecauseChrist, inhisplaceandstead,wascondemnedby it thathemightbefreed:‘Christhathredeemedusfromthecurseofthelaw,beingmadeacurse forus’ (Gal.3. 13). Itmaycondemnsin inus,but cannot

condemnusforsin.

(5) Because he has appealed from it. We see this in the case of thepublican,whowasarrested,draggedintothecourtof justice, sentencedandcondemned.Butthishasnoforcebecausehemakeshisappeal,‘Godbemercifultomeasinner’(Luke18.13).HefliestoChrist,and,saysthetext, ‘He went down to his house justified’. So the court of the law(provided that your appeal is just) cannot condemn, because you haveappealedtothecourtofmercy.

Trueandtakeappealsfromthecourtofthelaw

Indeedtherearemanywhomakeafalseappeal.Theyappealinpart,notwholly, for they trust partly on Christ and partly on themselves.ManyappealtoChristforsalvationwhodonotappealtoHimforsanctification.Thisisfalse.ManyappealtoChristbeforetheyarebroughtintothecourtof lie law, before they are humbled, convinced, and condemned by thelaw.The caseof thepublican showswhatkindof appealwill do amangood.Condemnedinthecourtofthelaw,hemakeshisappealtoChristintheGospel.Readthewordsspokenofhim:‘Hestoodafaroff,andwouldnot liftupsomuchashiseyesuntoheaven,butsmoteuponhisbreast,saying,Godbemercifultomeasinner’.Herewasathreefolddemeanour,answering to a threefoldworkwithin him. First, he stood afar off; thisanswerstohisfearandconsternation.Then,hewouldnotsomuchasliftuphiseyes;thisanswerstohisshameandconfusion.Again,hesmotehisbreast;thisanswerstohissorrowandcompunction.Andbeinginsuchacasehethenappeals:‘Godbemercifultomeasinner’.

Inbrief,then,ifyourappealisarightoneandsuchaswilldoyougood,itmust be a total, not a partial, appeal. Youmust not come to Christ forsomereliefonly,but forall.Christmusthave thehonourofall.Also, itmustbeanappealforgraceaswellasmercy,forsanctificationaswellassalvation, an appeal to be made holy by Christ as well as to be madehappy by Christ. Again, it must be the appeal of a man humbled andcondemned inhimself.Nomanwill appeal to another court until he isfoundguiltyandcondemnedintheformer.Sohere,wecannotappealtoChristuntilfirstwearefoundguiltyandcondemnedbyMoses.Thistheapostle shows: ‘WehaveprovedbothJewsandGentiles tobeallunder

sin; as it iswritten.There isnone righteous,no,notone; there isnonethatunderstandeth,nonethatseekethafterGod’(Rom.3.9-11).

Thusrunstheindictmentandtheaccusationofthelaw,andinverse19isfoundthesentenceorjudgmentuponit,andtheretheapostletellsusthereasonwhythelawsaysthis:‘Thateverymouthmaybestopped,andalltheworldmaybecomeguiltybeforeGod’.Itiswhenthelawhasaccusedandsentencedus,whenithasstoppedourmouthsandwebecomeguilty,thatthesinnercomestomakehisappeal fromthe lawasacovenanttoChristasaSaviour.Helooksfornothingfromjustice,butallfrommercy.Andwhenhehasthusappealed,thelawhasnomoretodowithhim;heisnotunderthesentence,thepenaltiesofthelaw;heisoutof the law’sreach.Thelawcantakenoholdofhimforcondemnation;hehasfledtoChrist,andtakensanctuaryinHim.

Whataprivilege is this, tobe free from the curses andpenalties of thelaw,sothatifthelawthreatens,Christpromises;ifthelawcurses,Christblesses.Thisisahighprivilege.IfGoddidbutletonesparkofHiswrathanddispleasurefalluponyourconscienceforsin,youwouldthenknowwhatamercyitistobethusfreed.

(c)Freedomfromtheaccusationsofthelaw

Butnowweproceedtoconsiderthefreedomwhichthebelieverhasfromtheindictmentsandaccusationsofthelaw:

’Whoshall layanythingtothechargeofGod’select?’(Rom.8.33).Thismay be thought a strange question, ‘who shall?’, but there are severalsuchaccusers:

Satanisreadytolaythingstotheircharge.Heiscalled‘theaccuserofthesaints…nightandday’ (Rev. 12. 10).He is thegreatCalumniator,everbringing forward bills of indictment against the saints. Sometimes heaccusesGodtoman,asinthecaseofourfirstparents,wherehechargedGodwithenvytoHiscreatures,asifHehadforbiddenthetreelesttheyshouldbecometoowise.ItisordinarywithSatan,eithertoaccuseGod’smercy by tellingmen theymay sin and yetGodwill bemerciful, or toaccuseHisjusticebysayingthat,iftheysin,thereisnomercyforthem.

As he stretches God’s justice above the bounds of the Gospel, so hestretchesGod’smercyabovetheboundsofHistruth.

AndasSatanaccusesGodtoman,soheaccusesmantoGod.Sometimeshedoesthisbywayofcomplaint,asappearsinthecaseofJoshua(Zech.3.1-4).Inthisfashionheiseverchargingcrimeshome,andintroducingbillsof indictmentagainst thesaints.So that, inallhis temptations,wemay say, as theman said to Joab when he was asked why he had notkilledAbsalom:Thouthyselfdidsthearwhatthekingcommanded,thatAbsalom should not be hurt; and if I had done this thing, thou thyselfwouldesthavebeenthefirsttoaccusemetotheking’(2Sam.18.12-13).So may we answer Satan: Thou thyself dost know that God hathforbiddenthisthing;andifIshouldhavedoneit,wouldstnotthouhavebeen the first to accuseme toGod?Such is Satan’sway; he is first thetempter todrawus to sin, and thenanaccuser to accuseus toGod forsinning.

AtothertimesSatanusesthemethodofsuspicionandconjecture.ItwassointhecaseofJob.GodcommendsJob;Satancondemnshim,asifheknew Job better than God Himself. Nay, and though he could notcondemnJob’sactions,yethewouldquarrelwithhisaffections.Surely,whateverhisactionsare,yetJob’s intentionsarenotgood!ThiswasasmuchastotellGodthatHewasdeceivedinJob;itwasasifSatansaid,Certainly,whateverThouthinkestofJob,yetJobdothnotserveTheefornought. He is amercenary fellow, one that serves Thee for loaves, forbellyblessings.Thouhastheapedoutwardfavoursonhimandhastmadeahedgeabouthim, fencedhim inwithThy favoursso thatnothingcanannoyhim.ThusitisthatSatanbringshisaccusations.

But Satan cannot condemn. The issues of life and death are not in hishands,norwillhis accusationagainstusbeforeGod takeeffect.Amanwhoishimselfcondemned,thoughhehasthevoiceofaccusation,yethehasnopowertocondemn.Histestimonyagainstanotherisinvalid.Satanisacondemnedwretch,andallhisaccusationsagainstthesaintsbeforeGodhavenoeffect.Joshua’scaseshowsthis:thoughtheaccusationwastruethathewascladinfilthygarments,yetGodwouldnotreceiveit:TheLordrebuke thee,OSatan; isnot this abrandpluckedoutof the fire?’(Zech.3.2).

But it isnotonlySatanwhoaccusesus;wickedmenmaydo the same.Sometimestheydosojustly,forsinscommitted,butforgiven,andinthistheyshowtheirmaliceandlackofloveinnotforgettingthatwhichGodhas forgiven. Sometimes they accuse the godly unjustly, laying to theircharge things they never did, as Potiphar’s wife accused Joseph ofuncleannessbecausehewouldnotbeunclean.David,too,complainsthatmenlaidtohischargethingsheneverdid;soalso,Daniel.Butnonecancondemnthetrulygodly.

Again,notonlySatanandwickedmen,butconscienceitselfmayaccuse;andthen,isitpossibleforustosay.WhoshalllayanythingtothechargeofGod’s elect? Conscience, I say,may accuse, sometimes bringing truelight,sometimesfalseinformation,sometimesrevivingoldbillscancelledandcrossedlongago.Inthefirstcase,wearetolistentotheaccusationsofconsciencewhenitchargesustruly.Joseph’sbrethrenwereaccusedbytheir consciences when they were evil intreated in Egypt, and told bythem that they were verily guilty of the wrong done to Joseph. AfterDavid had numbered the people, his heart smote him. Conscience hadnotbeenabridle,anditwasnowawhip;ithadnotbeenacurb,thereforeit was now a scourge. David did not hearken to the warnings, andthereforehefeelsthelashingsofconscience.Andwhenconsciencejustlyaccuses us, when it comes inwith evidence according to theWord,wemusthearit,forthereGodspeaks.Ifasun-dialbenotsetbythesun,itisnomatterwhatitsays;butifitiscorrectbythesun,wemusthearkentoit.So, ifconsciencedoesnotspeakaccording to theWord,weneednotgiveheedtoitsaccusations,butifitspeaksaccordingtoevidencethere,itisgoodtolistentoit.

Sometimesconsciencechargesusfalsely.Itwillperhapstellusthatthosethingsaresinwhicharenotsin.Inthiscaseitisanerroneousconscienceandwe are not to listen to it.At other times consciencewill revive oldcases, answered and satisfied long ago. Then it is a quarrelsomeconscience, like a contentious troublesome fellow at law, and God willdealwith itasanhonest judgewithsucha fellow;Hecaststhechargesout of court asmatters notworth hearing, or as things that have beensettledlongago.Theseaccusationsmustnottakeholdofthesoul.Inthiscase, Isay,whenconsciencecondemns,God isgreater thanconscience,

toacquitandabsolvethesoul.

ButthereisafourthpartywhichisreadytolaysintothechargeofGod’speople,andthatisthelaw.Thelawmaycomeasaccuser.Howthencanitbesaid, ‘Whoshall layanythingto thechargeofGod’select?’, for if thelawmayaccuse,wecannotbe said tobe free fromthe indictmentsandaccusations of the law. I answer thus: if we speak of sins pardoned,neitherconscience,norSatan,norlaw,hasanyrighttoaccusethepeopleofGod.Godhasjustifiedthem,andwhothenshallaccuse?

Indeed, before faith,whilewe are under the law,we are subject to theaccusations, judgments, and sentences of the law. The law not onlyaccusesusthen,butitssentenceandcursetakeholdofus.Itaccusesus,as Christ told them that would not believe in Him, but looked forjustificationbythelaw:‘DonotthinkthatIwillaccuseyoutotheFather:there is one that accuseth you, evenMoses, inwhomye trust’ (John5.45).Thelawbywhichtheylookedtobejustifiedwouldaccusethem.Thelaw also sentences the sinner, and the sentence and curse take hold ofhim: ‘He that believeth not is condemned already… the wrath of Godabidethonhim’ (John3.18,36).So thatwhileaman isunder the law,before faith and interest in Christ, the law not only accuses but alsocondemnshim.

As for those, however, who have an interest in Christ, the law cannotaccuse them of sin committed before grace saved them, because it ispardoned,andthusthisaccusationismadevoid.Norcanthelawaccusethemofsinaftergracesavedthem,sinafterpardon.Theyarenotsubjectto theaccusations,arrests,andsentencesof the law.The lawcannot soaccuse believers as to call them into the court of the law; so the wordsignifies,‘WhoshalllayanythingtothechargeofGod’select?’;orrather.Whoshallcallthemintocourt?Thewordnotonlysignifiestoaccuse,buttosummontocourt(jusvocare).Yetthebelieverisfreedfromthelawasa covenant, and hence from its judgments, sentences, condemnations,curses, and accusations. If it sends any of its officers to accuse us andarrestusforsin,wemayrefusetoobeyandtoappearinitscourt,forwearetobetriedbyanothercourt;wearetobetriedbytheGospel.IfGod’speople, when they have sinned, go to the right court, they will bothsoonerget sorrow for sin, andassuranceof thepardonof sin; theywill

findmoresorrowandlessdismayforsin.

WhenIsaythatwearefreedfromtheaccusationsofthelaw,Imeansuchaccusations as are subordinate to condemnation. There is a twofoldaccusation,first,anaccusationleadingtoconvictionandhumiliationforsin,second,anaccusation

resultinginsentenceandcondemnationforsin.Alltheaccusationsofthelawagainstthosewhoareunderthelawcomeunderthesecondhead.Butallitsaccusationsagainstthegodlyforsinarewithaviewtoconvictionandthehumiliationof thegodlyunder it,andsoaresubordinateto lifeand salvation. And so I conceive the law may accuse those who are,notwithstanding, the freemenofChrist. Itmayshowthemhowfar theycomeshortofthegloryofGod,andhowfartheyhavewanderedfromthepaths of righteousness, andmay accuse them for it; but this results inhumiliation, not condemnation. As I shall show hereafter, either thismustbeso,orelseitmustbedeniedthatthelawisaruleforbelievers.

Buttherearetwoqueriesthatarisehere.Thefirstiswhetherthelawmayjustlyaccuseus,seeingthatwearenotunderit.BrieflyIanswerthatweare not under its curses, but we are under its commands.We are notunderthelawforjudgment,butweareunderthelawforconduct.Sofaraswewalknotaccordingtoit,asarule,ithasanaccusingpower,thoughwe are taken from under its condemning power. There is no furtherpower left in the law than is for our good, our humiliation, ouredification,andthisisintendedtoleadtoourfurtheranceingrace.

Thesecondqueryiswhetherthelawisjustinitsaccusationsagainstus,seeingwedonotsin.Thisisfoundedonthepreviousquery;ifitbetruethatwearefreedfromthelawasaruleorasadirectionoflife-werethisso,itwouldbeourbondageratherthanourfreedom-thenourbreachesofthelawarenotsin.Ifwearenotsubjecttolaw,thenwedonotsininthebreakingofit,anymorethanwedoifwebreakthelawsofSpainorofanyothernations,whicharenolawstous.

I shall show later the invalidityand thedangerof these twoqueries. InthemeantimeImusttellyouthatthelawinitsdirectivepowerremainswith the believer. Thismust needs be plain from the words: ‘The law,

which was four hundred and thirty years after (the promise), cannotdisannul (thepromise), that it shouldmake thepromiseofnoneeffect’(Gal.3.17).Forifthelaw,astheapostlesays,wasgiven430yearsafterthepromise,thenitwasgiveneitherasacovenantorasarule.Butasacovenantitcouldnotbegiven,forthenGodwouldhaveactedcontrarytoHimself, first in giving a covenant of grace and then one of works.ThereforeHegaveitasarule,torevealtous,afterourjustificationbythepromise,aruleofwalkingwithGodsothatinallthingswemightpleaseHim.

Furthermore,thatcanneverbesaidtobeapartofourfreedomwhichisapartofourbondage;norcanthatbesaidtobepartofourbondagewhichispartofourholiness.Butconformity to the law,andsubjection to thelawofGod,ispartofourholiness.Thereforeitcanneverbesaidtobeapart of our bondage. There is, indeed, a twofold subjection - thesubjectionofason,andthesubjectionofaslave.Wearefreedfromtheone,namely,thesubjectionofaslave,whichwasapartofourbondage,butnotfromtheother,namely,thesubjectionofason,whichisapartofourfreedom.ButIshallspeakofthisatgreaterlengthinthediscoursesthatfollow.

(d)FreedomFromtherigourofthelaw

Inthe fourthplace,observe that thebeliever is freed fromtherigouroftheobediencerequiredinthelaw.Heisnotfreedfromtherequirementof exact obedience, but from that rigour of obedience which the lawrequiredasaconditionofsalvation.

First,thelawnotonlycommandeddifficult,butalsoimpossiblethingsofus.It laidayokeuponusthatwecouldnotbear,anditwouldnot,andcouldnot,giveustheleastassistancetowardsobedience.Asitwaswiththe scribes andPharisees,who laid heavy yokes and burdens onmen’sshouldersbutwouldnottouchthemwithoneoftheirfingers,soitiswiththe law. It lays heavy yokes uponus, but gives us not the least help ornecessarystrengthforfulfillingitsrequirements.Itcommands,butgivesneither strength nor grace for fulfilment. Therefore divines havecomparedtherigourof the lawtothebondageofIsraelunderPharaoh,who required the tale of bricks but supplied no straw. So, too, the law

requires the full measure of obedience; it abates nothing in thecommand:butitgivesnohelpforthefulfilmentofit.ItanswersusinthismatterasthepriestsdidJudas,‘Seethoutothat’.

ButnowintheGospelwearefreedfromimpossibilities.Hereallthingsarepossible,not in respectof ourselvesbut in respectofGod,whohasundertaken toworkall ourworks inusand forus.ChrysostomblessedGodthatthatwhichGodrequiredofhim,Hehadgiventohim.Indeed,theworksoftheGospelareasgreatasanyworksofthelaw,nay,greater,namely,tobelieve,whichisagreaterworkthantodoallthedutiesofthelaw.ButGodhasgivenusmorestrength;wehavecommunionwiththepower and strength of Christ. Just as ‘without me ye can do nothing’(John15.5), so ‘I candoall things throughChristwhich strengthenethme’(Phil.4.13).AweakChristianandastrongChristshallbeabletodoall.NothingwillbetoohardforthatmanwhohasthestrengthofChristto enable him, and the Spirit of Christ to work with him. If Godcommandstheworksofanangel,andgivesusthestrengthofanangel,all will be easy. The works commanded may be difficult in respect ofDivine imposition, but they are easy in respect of Divine co-operation.Thelawwasaspirituallaw,buttheGospelisthelawoftheSpirit(Rom.8.2). It thereforeenablesus todowhat it commands tobedone.Takeone instance.InRomans6.12, theSpiritenjoins thatweshouldnot letsinreigninourmortalbodies.Thatisthecommand.Readoninverse14:‘Sinshallnothavedominionoveryou,foryearenotunderthelaw,butundergrace’.Thereisthepromise,linkedwiththereasonforit;asifhehadsaid.Hadyoubeenunderthelawyoucouldnothaveexpectedsuchassistance,butyouareundergrace,andthereforeshallhavethepowertoobey.

Secondly, it belonged to the rigour of the law that the law requiredobedienceinourownpersons;itwouldnotallowanytodoortoworkforusandhelpintheperformanceofitsrequirement.Butwearenowfreedfromthisrigour,andGodwillacceptofourobediencebyanother.TherewasatwofolddebtthatweowedtoGod,thedebtofsinandthedebtofservice.ThesetwowerebothtransferredtoChrist,andHehasfulfilledallrighteousnessforus,boththeobedienceandthesuffering,sothatwearenowsaidtobe‘completeinhim’(Col.2.10),thoughinourselvesweare

imperfect.

Thirdly,thisbelongedtotherigourofthelaw,thatitrequireduniversalandactual,aswellaspersonal,obedience,yea,andwithsuchadegreeofrigour that if aman failed in one tittle hewas lost for ever: ‘Cursed iseveryonethatcontinuethnotinallthingswhicharewritteninthelawtodo them’ (Gal. 3. 10). Here was the call for an obedience, personal,universal, actual, constant and perpetual, failure inwhich in respect ofanytittleatanytime,broughtamanunderthecurseofthe law.Allhisdesires, allhis endeavours,wouldnot serve the turn. Ifhe failed in theleasttittle,hewasundoneforever.Norepentance,notears,noprayers,no future amendswouldmakeup for the failure.TheGospel admits ofrepentance,butthelawwillnotownit.Thelawlooksforexactobediencein every jot and tittle. From this rigid obedience has God freed thebeliever. Insteadofuniversalactualobedience,God ispleasedtoacceptofuniversalhabitualobedience,aswefinditwritten:ThenshallInotbeashamed,whenIhaverespectuntoallthycommandments’(Ps.119.6).Though there may be failing in action, yet where there is truth ofaffection,GodcanownitIntheGospelGodacceptsaffectionsforactions,endeavoursforperformance,desireforability.AChristianismadeupofdesires, ofmournings, thirstings and bewailings: O thatmy ways weredirected!OmiserablemanthatIam!HereisGospelperfection.

Adam’s want was will rather than power, ours rather power than will.Thereisthewilltodo,butthelackofpowertodo.Notthatthewillisnowperfect,foraswecannotdothethingswewoulddo(thereisfleshinourmembers),sowecannotwill the thingsweshouldwill (there is flesh inourwills);butyet,Isay,thefailingofGod’speopleismorefromwantofpower thanwantofwill.There is thewill todo,but thepower todo islacking,assaystheapostle:towillispresentwithme;buthowtoperformthatwhich is good I findnot’(Rom.7. 18).YetGodhasmercy for ‘can-nots’,butnonefor‘will-nots’.Godcandistinguishbetweenweaknessandwickedness. While you are under the law, this weakness is yourwickedness, a sinful weakness, and therefore God hates it. Under theGospelHelooksnotupontheweaknessofsaintsastheirwickedness,andtherefore He pities them. Sin makes those who are under the law theobjectsofGod’shatred.Sin inabelievermakeshimtheobjectofGod’s

pity.Men,youknow,hatepoison ina toad,butpity it inaman. In theoneitistheirnature,intheothertheirdisease.Sininawickedmanisaspoisoninatoad;Godhatesitandhim;itistheman’snature.ButsininachildofGodislikepoisoninaman;Godpitieshim.Hepitiesthesaintsforsinsandinfirmities,buthatesthewicked.Itisthenatureoftheone,thediseaseoftheother.

Fourthly, this again shows the rigour of the law, that it enforced itselfupon the conscience with threats and with terror; but now the Gospelcomes otherwise, with beseechings and with love. ‘1 beseech you,brethren,bythemerciesofGod’(Rom.12.1).IntheGospelthespiritisnotaspiritofbondageandfear,butaspiritofpowerandoflove(Rom.8.15; 2 Tim. 1. 7). The law urges obedience upon pain of eternal death(Deut.27.14-26;Gal.3.10),andenforcesitsdemandsbyterror,buttheGospelbysweetnessandlove;allterrorisgone.Thebookofthelawwasplacedbetween the cherubimandunder themercy-seat, to tell us that,undertheGospel,everylawcomesnowtothesaintsfromthemercy-seat.

Allrigourhasgoneandnothingbutsweetnessisthemotivetoit,andtheprincipleofobedience:‘TheloveofChristconstrainsus’(2Cor.5.14),asthe apostle says. There is nothing more powerful than love. Thingsimpossible to others are easy to the in that love. Love knows nodifficulties:‘myyokeiseasy,myburdenislight’(Matt.11.30).Loveisanaffection that refuses to be put off by duties or difficultieswhich comebetween it and thepersonbeloved. Jacob served ahard apprenticeshipforRachel,andyet,saystheScripture,heesteemedsevenyears,butafewdays, for the lovehehad toher’ (Gen.29.20).Love shortens timeandfacilitateslabour.WhenAchilleswasaskedwhatenterpriseshefoundthemosteasyofallhehadundertakeninhislife,heanswered,ThosewhichIundertook for a friend.’ This is the spirit which God implants in Hischildren,notaspiritoffear,butaspiritoflove,whichisthespringofalltheir actions, andwhichmakes those thingswhich otherwisewould betasks and burdens, refreshments and delights. A godly man takes inwhateverconcernshishappinessbyfaith,andlaysoutwhateverconcernshisdutybylove.FaithandlovearetheallofaChristian.Theapostlesaysso:, For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, noruncircumcision;but faithwhichworkethby love’ (Gal. 5. 6).Faith, like

Mary,sitsat the feetofChrist tohearHisWord,and love, likeMartha,compassesHimaboutwithservice.Faithisthegreatreceiver,andloveisthegreatdisburser;we take inallby faithand layoutallby love.This,then, isanotherprivilegewhichbelieversenjoy; theyare freed fromtherigour of the law. And there are other privileges also which, because Iwouldhastenon,Ishallbutname.

(iv)Freedomhornobediencetomen

In the next place we observe that the believer is not only freed fromSatan,fromsin,andfromthelaw;heisalsofreedfromobediencetomen.We have no lords over us; men are our brethren; and our Lord andMasterisinheaven.WefindinScriptureadoublecharge:donotusurpmastership, do not undergo servitude. Consider the first, not to usurpmastership.WereadintheWord:‘BenotyecalledRabbi:foroneisyourMaster, even Christ; and all ye are brethren…. Neither be ye calledmasters:foroneisyourMaster,evenChrist’(Matt.23.8-10).

Asforthesecond,nottoundergoservitude,weread:Yeareboughtwithaprice;benotyetheservantsofmen’(1Cor.7.23).Themeaningis,thatwearenot toacknowledgeanyour suprememaster,norarewe togiveour faith and consciences,nor enthral our judgments, to the sentences,definitions, or determinations of anyman ormen upon earth, becausethis would be tomakemenmasters of our faith, which the apostle somuchabhorred:‘Wearenotmastersofyourfaith,buthelpersofyourjoy’(2Cor.1.24).Therearetwokindsofmasters,mastersaccordingtotheflesh, andmasters according to the spirit.The first kind you read of inEph. 6. 5-7: ‘Servants, be obedient to them that are your mastersaccordingtotheflesh’.ThesecondkindwereadofinMatt.23.8-10,asalreadymentioned. To ourmasters according to the fleshwe are to beobedient,sofarasappertainstotheoutwardman,inalloutwardthings.Butofoursoulsandconsciences,aswehaveno fathers, sowehavenomastersuponearth,onlyourMasterandFatherwhichisinHeaven;andinthissenseChristspeaks,thatwemustnotabsolutelyyieldupourselvestoberuledbythewillofany,norenthralourjudgments,norsubmitourfaithandconsciencestoanypowerbelowChrist.Itwerehighusurpationforanytorequireit;itistotrespassonChrist’sRoyalPrerogative,anditwerenolessiniquityforustorenderit.Thusmuch,then,forthefourth

branchofourfreedom;Imayspeakmoreuponitlater.

(v)Freedomfromdeath

Again, thebeliever is freed fromdeath.There are three kinds of death:firstly, a spiritual death, the death of the soul in the body; secondly, anatural death, the death of the body from the soul; thirdly, an eternaldeath, thedeath of soul andbody for ever. The first and third of thesebelieversdonotdoubtof; all thequestion isabout the second, namely,naturaldeath,ofwhichIshallsaynomorethanthis,that it is thebodyonlythatdies,man’sinferiorpart,yetourdustandbonesarestillunitedto theSonofGod.But thebeliever is freed fromdeath as a curse. Thenatureofdeath is takenaway, and therefore thename is changed. It isbutcalledasleep,andasleepinChrist,andagatheringtoourfathers,achange, a departing. Death is the godly man’s wish, the wicked man’sfear. Aristippus, being asked in a stormwhy he did not fear aswell asothers, answered: There is a great difference between us; they fear thetormentsduetoabadlife;Iexpecttherewardsduetoagoodlife.’Thereisanotheraspecttoabeliever’sfreedomfromdeath-hewillnotdieuntilthebesttime.Indeed,noneshalldieuntilGod’stime.WhatDavidsaidtohisenemies,somayanymansay:‘mytimesareinthyhand’(Ps.31.15).But this is not always the best time: you may die with Belshazzar,carousing; with Ananias and Sapphira, lying; with the nobleman,unbelieving; 1 with Julian, 2 blaspheming. But this is the privilege ofsaints,thattheyshallnotdieuntil thebesttime,notuntilwhen, if theywerebutrightlyinformed,theywoulddesiretodie.

Mencutdownweedsatanytime,buttheircorntheywillnotcutdowntillthebest time. ‘You areGod’s husbandry’, says the apostle; you areHiswheat,andwhenyouareripe,whenyouhavedoneyourwork,then,andnottillthen,shallyoubegatheredintoyourMaster’sgarner.

(vi)Freedomfromthegrave

Lastly, believerswill be freed from the grave, and this belongs to theirconsummated freedom. We shall but touch the subject by giving youthreeconclusions: (i)Thoughourbodiesdieandareconsumedtodust,yetthey shall rise fresh, heavenly and glorious. They shall arise perfect

bodies,freedfromsicknessandallimperfections;spiritualbodies(iCor.15. 44), not in regard to substance but in regard to qualities; immortalbodies, never to die more; glorious bodies, every one filled withbrightnessandsplendour,shiningasthesuninthefirmament(Dan.12.3;Matt. 1343). (2) The bodies rise as the same bodies. The same soulshall be re-united to the same individual body. This is a mystery. Thephilosophers dreamed of a transformation of bodies, or bodiestransformedintonewshapes;andofa transmigrationofsouls,orsoulsflittingintonewbodies;buttheycouldneverapprehendthetruthofthis,theresurrectionofthebody.Itwasbeyondthemtothinkthatthissameindividualandnumerical1bodyshouldriseagainafterbeingcorruptedinwater,consumedby fire,converted intoearth,dissipated intoair, eatenup by fishes and those fishes eaten by men. When Paul disputed thispointatAthens,thegreatphilosophersoftheEpicureanslaughedathim:‘Whatwill thisbabbler say?’But theScripture tellsus thatweshall seeHimwiththesesameeyes(Job19.27).AnditagreeswithGod’s justicethatthesamebodieswhichhavesinnedorsufferedshallbepunishedorrewarded. (3) The soul and body shall never be parted more to alleternity.Whenabelieverdies,bydeathheisfreedfromdeath;afterthisreunionthereshallneverbeseparationmore.

FreedominitsPositiveAspects

Sofar,IhavespokenofthenegativeaspectsofChristianfreedom.

Ishallnextspeakalittleonthepositiveaspectofthesubject,whatwearefreeunto,andwillbutnameafewparticulars:

(1)Wearefreedfromastateofwrathandbroughttoastateofmercyandfavour(Eph.2.1-10).

(2)Wearefreedfromastateofcondemnationandbroughttoastateofjustification(Rom.8.1).Before,wewereunderthecondemnationofthelawbecausewehadsinned,andof theGospelbecausewebelievednot.But now there is ‘no condemnation’, not one condemnation. The lawcannotcondemnusbecausewehaveappealedfromit;theGospelcannotbecause we are now believers. God condemned sin in Christ that Hemight justify the sinner byChrist, and cast out condemnation for ever.

‘Hewillbringforthjudgmentuntovictory’(Matt.12.10).‘Hewillcastoutcondemnation for ever’ is theway inwhich anoldwriter construes thepassage,andthissenseitwillbear.

(3) We are freed from a state of enmity and brought into a state offriendship: ‘Andyouthatweresometimealienatedandenemies inyourmindbywickedworksyetnowhathhereconciled’(Col.1.21).

(4)Wearefreedfromastateofdeathandbroughttoastateoflife:Youhathhequickened,whoweredeadintrespassesandsins’(Eph.2.1).

(5)Wearefreedfromastateofsinandbroughtintoastateofservice:‘Webeingdeliveredoutofthehandofourenemiesmightservehimwithoutfear’(Luke1.74).ForthisreasonGoddischargedthedebtofsinthatwemight renderHim the debt of service. He freed us from the bonds ofmiserythatwemighttakeuponustheengagementsofduty(Rom.8.12).Aftermentioning all the benefits brought to the believer by Christ, hedrawsthisinference:‘Therefore,brethren,wearedebtors’.Hethatthinksnot service to be his freedom thinks not sin to be his bondage, andthereforeheisinbondage.

(6)Wearefreedfromastateofbondage,aspiritofslaveryinservice,andbrought into a spirit of sonship and liberty in service.AsChrist byHisbloodredeemedusfrombeingslaves,sobyHisobedienceandSpiritHehasredeemedustobesons.Nowwearedrawntoservice,notwithcordsoffear,butwiththebandsoflove;notbycompulsionsofconscience,butby the desires of nature (2 Peter 14). As the love ofGod to uswas thespringofallHisactionstous,soourlovetoGodisthesourceofallourobediencetoHim.

(7)Inaword-forwecannotstaytonameall-wearefreedfromdeathand hell, and brought to life and glory. Heaven is our portion, ourinheritance,ourmansion,louse.Itwasmadeforus,andweforit;wearevessels prepared for glory (Rom. 9. 23).And this is called ‘thegloriouslibertyofthesonsofGod’(Rom.8.21;Eph.1.14).Totellyouwhatyouarefreedfrom,andwhatyoushallenjoyhereafter-totakeyoutothetopofNebo and showyou all thisCanaan—wouldmakeyouwilling to laydownyourbodiesthere(asdidMoses)andgouptoenjoyit.Butitisfar

beyondman’spowertoopenthisprivilegetoview,evenalittle.‘Eyehathnotseen,norearheard,neitherhaveenteredintotheheartofman,thethingswhichGodhathpreparedforthemthatlovehim’(1Cor.2.9).Yetthis is spokenofgrace,and thereforewhat isglory?Couldwebutopenthisuptoyou,itwereevenenoughtoputyouintoHeavenwhileyouarehereuponearth.It iscalledtheNewJerusalem,glory, joy, theMaster’sjoy,theFather’shouse,theKingdomofglory.Heaven,Light,Life,EternalLife.Look but on that one place (2 Cor. 4. 17): For our light affliction,which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding andeternalweightofglory’:glory,weightofglory,exceedingweightofglory,more exceeding weight of glory; a far more exceeding weight of glory,nay, a farmore exceeding and eternal weight of glory! And this is theglorious libertyof thesonsofGod!But Imustconcludeon thismatter,because Iwouldnotwillinglykeepyouoff from thatwhich is tobethechiefpartofmydiscourse.

Wehavethusbriefly,asfarasthebreadthandscopeofthesubjectwouldallow, finished the three general points which we proposed in thehandling of this doctrine - the quality, the nature, and the branches ofChristian freedom. Imust now come to the application of what I havesaid, and the largeness of the subject will afford much comfort andcaution,muchdirectionandencouragementtothepeopleofGod.ButIhaveotherworktodofirst.

2.TheMoralLawaRuleofObedience

QueryI:AreChristianstreedfromthemorallawasaruleofobedience?

Ourtext(John8.36)isthemainbasiswhereonthisdoctrineofChristianfreedom is built. But many have endeavoured to build their ownsuperstructures, hay and stubble, upon it, which the foundation willnever bear. Indeed, there are somany opinionswhich plead patronagefrom this doctrine that I conceive it is my great work to vindicate soexcellentadoctrineasthisis-trueChristianfreedom-fromthosefalse,andImaysaylicentious,doctrineswhicharefastenedandfathereduponit.Imustshowyouthatneitherthisdoctrine,noryetthistext,willaffordcountenanceto,orcontributeanystrengthtothepositionsandopinionswhichsomewouldseemtodeducefromitandbuilduponit.

Theworkisgreat,forIamtodealwiththegreatestknotsinthepracticalpartofdivinity,andmen’sjudgmentsarevarious.Scriptureispleadedonall hands. Themore difficult thework, themore need of your prayers,that theFatherof lightswouldgobeforeus, andbyHis own light leadandguideusintothewaysofalltruth.Inthisconfidenceweshallventuretolaunchintothesedeeps,andbegintheexaminationandtrialofthosedoctrineswhicharededucedfrom,andwouldseemtobebuiltupon,thistext.Thefirstdoctrine,andthemainone,thattheywouldseemtobuilduponthistextis,thatbelieversarefreedfromthelaw.Andthisshallbethefirstquestionwewillexamine.

Inanswertothisqueryasitispropounded,wemustconfessthatwearenot without some places of Scripture which declare the law to beabrogated,norwithoutsomeagainthatspeakofitasyetinforce.Wewillgiveyouatasteofsomeofthem;andshallbeginwiththosethatseemtospeakoftheabrogationofthelaw.

Jeremiah 31. 31-33: ‘Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I willmake a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house ofJudah;notaccordingtothecovenantthatImadewiththeirfathersinthe

daythatItookthembythehandtobringthemoutofthelandofEgypt;whichmy covenant they brake, although Iwas an husband unto them,saith theLord: but this shall be the covenant that Iwillmakewith thehouseofIsrael;Afterthosedays,saiththeLord,Iwillputmylawintheirinwardparts,andwriteitintheirhearts;andwillbetheirGod,andtheyshallbemypeople.’

Romans7.1-3:‘Knowyenot,brethren(forIspeaktothemthatknowthelaw),howthatthelawhathdominionoveramanaslongasheliveth?Forthewomanwhichhathanhusbandisboundbythelawtoherhusbandsolongasheliveth;butifthehusbandbedead,sheisloosedfromthelawofher husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married toanother man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband bedead,sheisfreefromthatlaw;sothatsheisnoadulteress,thoughshebemarriedtoanotherman.’

Thattheapostleherespeaksofthemorallawisevidentfromtheseventhverse;andthatbelieversarefreedfromit,seethesixthverseandothers.SeealsoRom.6.14:‘Forsinshallnothavedominionoveryou:foryearenot under the law, but under grace’; Gal. 3. 19, The law was addedbecauseoftransgressions,tilltheseedshouldcome’;Gal.4.4-5,‘Godsentforthhis Son,madeof awoman,madeunder the law, to redeem themthat were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons’;Rom.8.2,‘ForthelawoftheSpiritoflifeinChristJesushathmademefreefromthelawofsinanddeath’;Gal.5.18,‘ButifyebeledoftheSpirit,yearenotunderthelaw’;Rom.10.4,‘ForChrististheendofthelawforrighteousnesstoeveryonethatbelieveth’;1Tim.1.8-10,Thelawisgoodif a man use it lawfully, knowing this, that the law is not made for arighteousman’,etc.

There seems therefore tobea greatdealof strength in theScripture toprovetheabrogationofthelaw,thatwearedeadtothelaw,freedfromthe law,nomoreunder the law.TheseScriptureswe shallhave todealwithafterwards.Forthepresent,Ionlyquotethem,toletitbeseenwithwhatstrengththeScripturesseemtoholdoutforthefirstopinion,thatis,fortheabrogationofthelaw.

Ontheotherhand,therearesomeScriptureswhichseemtoholdupthe

law,andwhichsaythatthelawisstillinforce:Isay,somewhichseemtosupport theobligation,as theothers theabrogation,of it.Thus there isRom.3. 31: ‘DoWe thenmake void the law through faith?God forbid:yea,weestablishthelaw.’Thisseemscontrarytotheformer;theversespreviously given seem to speak of the abrogation, this of theestablishment, the obligation, of the law. So alsoMatt. 5. 17-18: ‘ThinknotthatIamcometodestroythelawortheprophets;Iamnotcometodestroybuttofulfil.ForverilyIsayuntoyou,Tillheavenandearthpass,onejotoronetittleshallinnowisepassfromthelaw,tillallbefulfilled.’Upon these varieties of texts, men have grounded their varieties ofopinionsfortheabrogationof,ortheobligationof, the law.There isnoquestion but the Scripture speaks truth in both; they are the words oftruth;andthoughtheyseemheretobeastheaccusersofChrist,neveraonespeakingliketheother,yetifweareabletofindoutthemeaning,weshall find them like Nathan and Bathsheba, both speaking the samethings.

Inordertofindoutthetruthundertheseseemingcontraries,andforthepurpose of answering the query, lestwe should beat the air and spendourselves to no purpose, itwill be necessary tomake two inquiries: (i)what ismeantby theword ‘law’? (2) inwhat sense is thewordused inScripture?When thishasbeendone therewillbeawayopened for theclearingofthetruthandfortheansweringofthequeries.

TheScripturalUsesoftheWordLaw

( 1) What is meant by the word ‘law’? I answer: the word which isfrequently used for ‘the law’ in the Old Testament is Torah’. This isderivedfromanotherwordwhichsignifies‘tothrowdarts’,andcomestosignify ‘to teach, to instruct, to admonish’; hence it is used for anydoctrine or instruction which teaches, informs, or directs us: as, forexample, inProverbs13.14: ‘Thelawofthewiseisa fountainof life, todepartfromthesnaresofdeath.’Here ‘law’ istakenina largesenseforany doctrine or direction which proceeds from the wise; so, too, inProverbs 3. 1 and 4.2. In theNew Testament theword ‘law’ is derivedfrom another word which signifies ‘to distribute’, because the lawdistributes,orrenderstoGodandmantheirdues.

Inbrief, thisword ‘law’, in itsnatural significationboth in theOldandNewTestaments, signifies anydoctrine, instruction, law,ordinance,orstatute, divine or human, which teaches, directs, commands, or bindsmentoanydutywhichtheyowetoGodorman.Somuch,then,forthefirstmatter.

(2)Inwhatsensesisthisword‘law’usedinScripture?Ishallnottroublethe readerwithall theusesof theword,but shall confinemyself to thechiefofthem:

(i) It is sometimes taken for the Scriptures of the Old Testament, thebooksofMoses,thePsalms,andtheProphets.SotheJewsunderstooditinJohn12.34:‘WehaveheardoutofthelawthatChristabidethforever’.So also in John 15. 25: This cometh to pass, that the word might befulfilledthatiswrittenintheirlaw,Theyhatedmewithoutacause’(Ps.35.19).Similarly,wehave1Cor.14.21: ‘In the law it iswritten’,wheretheapostle isrepeatingthewordsof Isaiah28.11,andhesays theyarewritteninthelaw.

(ii)Theterm‘law’issometimesusedasmeaningthewholeWordofGod,itspromisesandprecepts,as inPs.19.7:thelawoftheLordisperfect,converting the soul’. Conversion is the fruit of the promise. Neitherjustification nor sanctification is the fruit of the law alone. The lawcommands but gives no grace, so that here the psalmist includes thepromiseofgraceinhisuseof‘law’;orelseconversion,ashespeaksofithere,doesnotmeanregeneration.

(iii),‘Law’issometimestakenforthefivebooksofMoses,asinGal.3.21:‘If there had been a law given which could have given life, verilyrighteousnessshouldhavebeenbythelaw’.Likewise, inJohn1.45: ‘WehavefoundhimofwhomMosesinthelaw…didwrite’.SimilarlyinLuke24.44: ‘All things must be fulfilled which were written in the law ofMoses’,meaningthefivebooksofMoses;seealsoGal.4.21.

(iv) ‘Law’ is used for thepedagogyofMoses, as in John 5. 46: ‘Had yebelievedMoses,yewouldhavebelievedme:forhewroteofme.‘SeealsoJosh.1.7-8.

(v)Sometimes‘law’isusedforthemorallawalone,theDecalogue,asinRom.7.7,14and21.

(vi)Sometimes‘law’referstotheceremoniallaw,asinLuke16.16.

(vii) Sometimes ‘law’ refers to all the laws, moral, ceremonial, andjudicial, as inJohn 1. 17:The e lawwasgivenbyMoses, but grace andtruthcamebyJesusChrist’:‘grace’inoppositiontothemorallaw,‘truth’in opposition to the ceremonial law which was but a shadow. ThusChrysostom comments on this passage: ‘The ceremonial law was givenrightuptothetimeofthecomingoftheseedpromisedtoAbraham.’

Among all these different usages, the controversy lies in the last-mentioned, where the word, law’ signifies the moral, judicial, andceremonial law. In respect of two of these varieties of law, we findconsiderableagreement;themaindifficultyconcernsthemorallaw.

Theceremoniallawwasanappendixtothefirsttableofthemorallaw.ItwasanordinancecontainingpreceptsofworshipfortheJewswhentheywere in their infancy, and was intended to keep them under hope, topreservethemfromwill-worship,andtobeawallofseparationbetweenthemandtheGentiles.Thislaw,allagree,isabrogatedbothintruthandinfact.

Asforthejudiciallaw,whichwasanappendixtothesecondtable,itwasan ordinance containing precepts concerning the government of thepeople in thingscivil,and itservedthreepurposes: itgave thepeoplearule of common and public equity, it distinguished them from otherpeoples,anditgavethematypeofthegovernmentofChrist.ThatpartofthejudiciallawwhichwastypicalofChrist’sgovernmenthasceased,butthatpartwhichisofcommonandgeneralequityremainsstillinforce.Itisacommonmaxim:thosejudgmentswhicharecommonandnaturalaremoralandperpetual.

However, in respect of the ceremonial and the judicial lawwe find fewdissenters.Allthecontroversyarisesfromthethirdpart,themorallaw.Andsowecometospeakofthemorallawwhichisscatteredthroughoutthe whole Bible, and summed up in the Decalogue. For substance, it

contains such things as are good andholy, and agreeable to thewill ofGod,beingtheimageofthedivinewill,abeamofHisholiness,thesumofwhichislovetoGodandlovetoman.

It is one of the great disputes in these days,whether thismoral law isabrogated,or,inthewordsofthequery,whetherbelieversarefreedfromthe moral law. All agree that we are freed from the curses andmaledictions, from the indictments and accusations, from thecompellings and irritations, and other particulars which we namedbefore.But thequestion is, toput it inplain terms:Arebelievers freedfromobediencetothemorallaw,thatis,fromthemorallawasaruleofobedience?

Some there arewhopositively or peremptorily affirm thatweare freedfrom the law as a rule, and are not, since Christ came, tied to theobedience of it. Others say that it still remains in force as a rule ofobedience, though abolished in other respects, as Beza says: ‘Christfulfilledthelawforus,butnotinordertorenderitofnovaluetous.’Weare still under the conduct and commands of the law, say theseChristians,thoughnotunderitscursesandpenalties.

Again,otherssaythatwearefreedfromthelaw,asgivenbyMoses,andareonly tied to theobedienceof it,as it isgiven inChrist:and though,they say,we are subject to those commands and that lawwhichMosesgave,yetnotashegaveit,butasChristrenewsit,andasitcomesoutofHishandandfromHisauthority:‘AnewcommandmentIgiveuntoyou,thatyeloveoneanother’(John13.34).Itisacommandment,forChristisbothaSaviourandaLord;andit isanewone,not that itdidnotexistbefore, but because now renewed, and becausewe have it immediatelyfromthehandsofChrist.

Ishallnotmuchquarrelwiththis.AcknowledgethemorallawasaruleofobedienceandChristianwalking,andtherewillbenofallingout,whetheryoutakeitaspromulgatedbyMoses,orashandedtoyouandrenewedbyChrist.

Indeed,thelaw,asitisconsideredasarule,cannomorebeabolishedorchangedthanthenatureofgoodandevilcanbeabolishedandchanged.

ThesubstanceofthelawisthesumofdoctrineconcerningpietytowardsGod, charity towards ourneighbours, temperance and sobriety towardsourselves.Andforthesubstanceofit,itismoralandeternal,andcannotbe abrogated.We grant that the circumstances under which themorallawwas originally given were temporary and changeable, and we havenownothingtodowiththepromulgator,Moses,norwiththeplacewhereitwasgiven,MountSinai,norwiththetimewhenitwasgiven,fiftydaysafterthepeoplecameoutofEgypt,noryetasitwaswrittenintablesofstone,deliveredwith thunderings and lightnings.We looknot to Sinai,thehillofbondage,buttoSion,themountainofgrace.WetakethelawastheimageofthewillofGodwhichwedesiretoobey,butfromwhichwedonotexpectlifeandfavour,neitherdowefeardeathandrigour.This,Iconceive,istheconcurrentopinionofalldivines.Forbelievers,thelawisabrogatedinrespectofitspowertojustifyorcondemn;butitremainsfullofforcetodirectusinourlives.Itcondemnssininthefaithful,thoughitcannot condemn the faithful for sin. Says Zanchius: The observance ofthelawisnecessaryforaChristianman,anditisnotpossibletoseparatesuchobservancefromfaith.’AndasCalvinsays: ‘Letusput far fromusthe ungodly notion that the law is not to be our rule, for it is ourchangeless rule of life.’ The moral law, by its teaching, admonishing,chiding,andreproving,preparesusforeverygoodwork.Thelawisvoidinrespectofitspowertocondemnus,butitstillhaspowertodirectus;wearenotunderitscurse,butyetunderitscommands.

Again, themoral law isperpetualand immutable.This isaneverlastingtruth,thatthecreatureisboundtoworshipandobeyhisCreator,andsomuchthemoreboundashehasreceivedthegreaterbenefits.Ifweclaimto be free from obedience, wemake ourselves the servants of sin. Butthese matters I shall speak more largely upon in the discourse thatfollows.

Therefore, against that opinionwhichholds forth the abrogationof thelaw, and says that we are freed from obedience to it, I shall state andendeavourtomakegoodtwopropositionswhichwillservefullytoanswerthequery,andtorefutethefalsenotions.Thepropositionsarethese:

(1) That the law, for the substance of it (for we speak not of thecircumstancesandaccessoriesof it),remainsasaruleofwalkingtothe

peopleofGod.

(2)That therewasnoendoruse forwhichthe lawwasoriginallygivenbut is consistentwith grace, and serviceable to the advancementof thecovenantofgrace.

Ifthesetwopropositionsaremadegood,thedoctrinesoftheabrogationofthelawandoffreedomfromthelawwillbothfalltotheground.

PropositionI:TheLawRemainsasaRuleofWalkingforthePeopleofGod

We shall begin with the first proposition, namely, that the law, in thesubstanceofit,remainsinforceasaruleofwalkingtothepeopleofGod.Ishallnotneedtostaylongoverthis,forwhenthesecondpropositionismadegooditwillbeseenthatitestablishesthisalso.BythelawismeantthemorallawcomprehendedintheDecalogueortencommandments.Bythesubstanceofit,Imeanthethingscommandedorforbiddenwhicharemorallygoodorevil,andcannotbechangedorabolished.Forwhatisthelawinthesubstanceofitbutthatlawofnatureengravenintheheartofman in innocency? and what was that but the express idea orrepresentation of God’s own image, even a beam of His own holiness,whichcannotbechangedorabolishedanymorethanthenatureofgoodandevilcanbechanged?AndthatthelawthusconsideredremainsasanunchangeableruleofwalkingtobelieversIamnowtoprove.

TheTestimonyoftheReformedConfessions

For this proof, not to mention individuals whose testimony might beproduced,evenasmanyalmostasmen,wehaveacloudofwitnessesifwe look upon the Confessions of Christian and Reformed Churches intheir agreement together. The Helvetian (Swiss) Church has thisconfession:ThusfaristhelawofGodabrogated,inthatithasnopowerto condemn believers….Notwithstanding, we do not disdainfully rejectthelaw,butcondemnthemasheresieswhicharetaughtagainstthelaw,thatitisnotaruleofwalking.’TheFrenchChurchhasthis: ‘Webelieveall the figures of the law to be taken away by the coming of Christ,

althoughthetruthandsubstanceofthemcontinuetousinHim,andarefulfilledtousinHim.ButthedoctrineofthelawisusedinthembothtoconfirmourlifeandthatwemaybethemoreestablishedinthepromisesoftheGospel.’AgreeabletothisistheBelgicConfession.

The Wittenberg Confession includes this: We acknowledge the law ofGod,whose abridgment is in theDecalogue, to command the best, themostjustandperfectworks,andweholdthatmanisboundtoobeythemoral precepts of the Decalogue/Neither are those precepts which arecontainedintheapostles’writingsanewlaw,butarebranchesoftheoldlaw.’Andagain,‘Itisneedfultoteachmenthattheymustnotonlyobeythelaw,butalsohowthisobediencepleasesGod.’

The Scottish Church confesses:, We do not think we are so freed bylibertyas ifweowednoobedience to the law;weconfess the contrary.’TheChurchofEnglandholdsasimilardoctrine:‘Althoughthelawgivenof God to Moses in regard of the rites and ceremonies does not bindChristians, neither is any, although a Christian, loosed from theobedience of the commandments which are called moral.’ To thesetestimoniesmightbeaddedmanymore.

ButitmaybethatsomemenregardtheseConfessionsasofnoauthorityandthereforetheyhavenopowerwiththem.Andindeed,ifthesethingsarenotproved fromtheWordofGod, theyhavenopowerwithus.Werespect good men and their writings, but we must not build our faithuponthemasasurefoundation.ThisisagainstourChristianliberty;wecannot be enslaved to the judgments of any. To the law and to thetestimony;iftheyspeaknotaccordingtothisword,itisbecausethereisno light in them.’We shall therefore give someproofs out of theWorditself,andthendrawargumentsfromthem.

TheTestimonyoftheNewTestament

WereadinMatt.5.17-18:ThinknotthatIamcometodestroythelawortheprophets:I.amnotcometodestroybuttofulfil;forverilyIsayuntoyou.Tillheavenandearthpass,onejotoronetittleshallinnowisepassfromthelaw,tillallbefulfilled.’Thisseemstobeveryfullandveryplain

forthecontinuanceofandobligationtothelaw.Andyettherearecorruptreadingsofthesewords,andassinisterinterpretations.Somewouldhaveit to be understood that Christwould not abolish the lawuntilHe hadfulfilled it. Indeed,Hewas ‘theendof the law’,as theapostlespeaks inRom. 10.4, but we must understand this to mean ‘the perfecting andconsummatingend’,not‘thedestroyingandabolishingend’ofthelaw.InChrist the law had an end of perfection and consummation, not ofdestructionandabolition.ItistobenotedthatinthisverseChristgivesastricterexpositionofthelaw,andvindicatesitfromthecorruptglossesofthePharisees,whichsurelyspeaksthecontinuance,nottheabrogation,ofthelaw.AndagreeabletothisisthelanguageoftheapostleinRom.3.31:‘Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, weestablish the law.’ How? Not for justification, for in this respect faithmakes it void, but as a rule of obedience, and in this respect faithestablishes it.Further, theapostle tellsus ‘that the law isholy, justandgood’andthat‘hedelightedinthelawofGodaftertheinwardman’andalso that ‘with themindImyself serve the lawofGod’ (Rom.7. 12,22,25).WiththisagreesJames2.8:‘Ifyefulfiltheroyallawaccordingtothescripture…yedowell’.Whatlawthiswas,heshowsintheeleventhversetobe theDecalogueormoral law.Likewise: ‘He that saith I knowhim,andkeepethnothiscommandments, isa liar’ (iJohn2.4);also: ‘Sin isthetransgressionofthelaw’(1John3.4).

Therefore,sinceChrist,whois thebestexpounderof the law,so largelystrengthensandconfirmsthelaw(witnesstheSermonontheMount,andalsoMark 10. 19); sm c e faithdoesnot supplant, but strengthens thelaw;sincetheapostlesooftenpressesandurgesthedutiescommandedinthelaw;sincePaulacknowledgesthatheservedthelawofGodinhismind,andthathewasunderthelawtoChrist(1Cor.9.21);Imayrightlyconcludethatthelaw,forthesubstanceofit,stillremainsaruleoflifetothepeopleofGod.

ButIwouldaddfurtherarguments,beginningwiththis: Ifever the lawwasaruleofwalking,thenitisstillaruleofwalking:thisisclear.Eitherit is still such a rule, or wemust shew the time when, as such, it wasabrogated. But no such time can be shewed. If it is said that it wasabrogatedinthetimeoftheGospelbyChristandHisapostles,wereply

thatnosuchthingcanbeproved.Itwasnotsoabrogatedatthattime.IfChrist and His apostles commanded the same things which the lawrequired, and forbade and condemned the same things which the lawforbadeandcondemned,thentheydidnotabrogate itbutstrengthenedand confirmed it. And this is what they did: see Matt. 5. 19: ‘He thatbreakethoneoftheleastofthesecommandments,andteachethmenso,shallbecalledtheleastinthekingdomofheaven;buthethatshallteachandobserve themshall be called (not legal preachers, but) great in thekingdomofheaven.’

Therefore,inthatChristHimselfexpoundedandestablishedthelaw,byHiswordandauthority,asshowninthefifth,sixth,andseventhchaptersofMatthew, it shows us the continuance of it; for had it beenHiswillutterly to abolish it.Hewould rather have declared against it, or havesufferedittodieofitself;andwouldnothavevindicatedit,andrestoredittoitspurityfromtheglossesofthePharisees.Allthisclearlyspeakstousofthecontinuanceof,andobligationto,thelaw.

As with Christ, so with the apostles: instead of abolishing, in theirdoctrinetheyestablishit,frequentlyurgingthedutiesofthelawuponthechurches and people of God:, Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves’(Rom. 12. 19).Why? ‘For it iswritten.Vengeance ismine’. Likewise, inRom. 13. 8-10. There the apostle repeats the commandments of thesecondtable,nottorepealorreverseanyofthem,buttoconfirmthemasaruleofwalking for thesaints.Hecomprehendsthemall in this:Thoushaltlovethyneighbourasthyself,forloveisthefulfillingofthelaw.’AsBezawrites:,Loveisnotperfectedexceptasthefulfillingofthelaw.’Seealso 1Thess.4.3,4, 7: ‘This is thewillofGod… thatye shouldabstainfromfornication…thatnomangobeyondanddefraudhisbrotherinanymatter;becausethattheLordistheavengerofallsuch.’SeealsoEph.6.1:‘Children,obeyyourparentsintheLord.’Theapostleherepressesthisduty from the authority of the precept, and persuades to it from thegraciousness of the promise, ‘for this is the first commandment withpromise’-aconditionalpromise(asBezasays),asareallsuchpromisesasarefoundinthelaw.AsfullandplainarethewordsoftheapostleinRom.3.31:‘Doweabrogatethelaw?No,weestablishitbyfaith.’Thoughit carriesanothersense, itbears this sensealso, that thoughwedisown

thelawinrespectofjustification,yetweestablishitasaruleofChristianliving.

Again,inMatt.3.10weread:‘theaxeislaidtotherootofthetree;everytreewhichbringethnotforthgoodfruit,ishewndownandcastintothefire’;andinMatt.5.22:,Whosoevershallsay tohisbrother.Thoufool,shallbeindangerofhellfire.’Intheseandsundryotherplaces,sosomelearned and holy divines tell us, the comminations and threatenings ofthe New Testament are not of the nature of the Gospel, but areconfirmationofthelaw,andplainlydemonstratetousthecontinuanceofthe law under grace. Thus Daniel Chamier distinguishes in the GospelbetweenthedoctrineoftheGospelandthegraceoftheGospel,betweenthepreachingoftheGospelbyChristandtheapostlesandthelawoffaithorspiritoflifeinChrist.ThepreachingordoctrineoftheGospel,hetellsus, contains two things, first the promise of grace, and second, theconfirmationof the law.Andheshowsthatall thosecommutationsandthreatswhichwereadintheScripturesoftheNewTestamentinnowaybelong to the nature of the Gospel properly so called, but are theconfirmationofthelaw,anddeclarethecontinuationofitnowundertheGospelasanexactruletodirectChristiansintheirwalkandobedience.

FiveProofsoftheBindingNatureoftheLaw

Before I proceed to the rest of the arguments, I will mention whatobjectorssaytothis.Someofthemsaythat,thoughthelawisarule,yetitisarulewhichwearefreetoobeyornottoobey:itisnotabindingrule.There are various opinions about this. Some say that it binds us nofurther thanasweare creatures. I answer: if so,why thenare theynotbound?IhopetheyarecreaturesaswellasChristians.Otherssaythatitbindsthefleshbutnotthespirit;itbindstheunregeneratepart,butnottheregeneratepartofaman,toobedience,fortheregeneratepartisfree.Ianswer:hereisadangerousgap,opentoalllicentiousness;witnesstheopinionsofDavidGeorgeandtheValentinians.OtherssaythatthelawisnotabindingruleatallandthatbelieversarenomoreunderthelawthanEnglandisunderthelawsofSpain;thatChristiansarenomoreboundtotheobedienceofthelawthanmenareboundtotheobedienceofthelawsofanothercommonwealththantheirown; tospeakotherwise, theysay,

overthrowsChristianliberty.

Nowif thisbetrue, itstrikesdownall. If itbearule,butnotabindingrule,arulebindingtoobedience,itwillbeofsmalluse.Wewillendthiscavil,therefore,beforewegoanyfurther,andshowthatthelawisindeedabindingrule,andthatitbindsChristians,notasmen,butasChristians.Iwillgivefiveargumentsinproofofthis:

(1)Thatwhichbeingobserved,causestheconsciencesofregeneratementoexcusethem,andwhich,notbeingobserved,causestheirconsciencesto accuse them, is binding on the conscience. But it is the law of Godwhichthuscausestheconsciencesof theregeneratetoexcuseorelsetoaccuse them. Therefore the law of God is that which is binding on theChristianconscience.

(2) That which has power to say to the conscience of the regenerateChristian, This ought to be done, and that ought not to be done, isbindingontheconscience.ButthelawofGodhasthispower.Therefore,though it cannot say that this or that ought not to be done on pain ofdamnation,oronpainof the curse;or thisor thatought to bedone inreferencetojustificationorthemeritingoflife;yetitshowsitoughttobedoneasgoodandpleasingtoGod,andthatthisorthatoughtnottobedone,asthingsdispleasingtoHim.

(3)TheauthoritybywhichtheapostlesurgedChristianstodutybindstheconsciencetoobedience.ButtheapostlesusedtheauthorityofthelawtoprovokeChristianstotheirduty(asinEph.6.1-2).ThereforethelawistherulebywhichChristiansmustwalk.

(4)IfthelawofGoddoesnotbindtheconscienceofaregeneratemantoobedience, then whatever he does which is commanded in the law, hedoesmorethanhisduty;andsoeithermeritsorsins,beingguiltyofwill-worship. But in obedience to the law he is not guilty of will-worship,neither does he merit: ‘When ye have done all those things which arecommanded you, say,We are unprofitable servants;we have done thatwhichwasourdutytodo’(Luke17.10).

(5) Either the law binds the conscience of Christians to obedience, or

Christiansdonotsininthebreachofthelaw.Buttheysininthebreachofit,assays1John3.4: ‘Sinisthetransgressionofthelaw’.Therefore,the transgression of the law is sin.Or look at it thus: If Christians areboundnottosin,thentheyareboundtokeepthelaw.ButChristiansareboundnottosin;thereforetheyareboundtokeepthe law.IknowthatobjectorswillagreethatChristiansareboundnottosin,butthattheywilldenythattheyareboundtoobeythelaw;butIwillprovemypointinthisway:Ifhethatbreaksthelawsins,thenChristiansareboundtokeepthelawiftheyarenottosin.Buthethatbreaksthelawdoessin,assaystheapostle:‘Sinisthetransgressionofthelaw’(1John3.4),and‘Wherenolaw is there is no transgression’ (Rom. 4. 15). therefore Christians arebound,iftheywouldavoidsin,toobeythelaw.

And now, being driven against the wall, the objectors have no way tomaintain the former error but by another. They tell us plainly thatbelieversdonotsin:‘BeinChristandsinifyoucan.‘Buttheapostletellsthem that they sin in saying this: ‘If we say that we have no sin, wedeceiveourselves,andthetruthisnotinus’(1John1.8).Nay,We‘makehim(thatis,God)aliar’(v.10).‘Ifwesay’,includestheapostlesaswellasothers,for ‘thereisnomanwhosinsnot’ (1Kings846). ‘Inmanythingsweoffendall’(James3.2).

FiveFurtherArgumentsforObediencetotheLaw

But if thiswill not silence them, then they say thatGod sees no sin inthose who are believers. But what is this? It is one thing to sin, andanotherforGodnottoseesin.Indeed,Heseesnotsin,eithertocondemnbelieversforsin,ortoapproveandallowofsininbelievers.Heseesnotsin,thatis,HewillnotseesintoimputeittouswhenweareinChrist.But if this does not convince the objectors, then they say: Thoughbelieverssin,andthoughGodsees it, forHeseesallandbringsall intojudgment,yetGodisnotdispleasedwiththesinsofbelievers.Ireply:

1.Certainly,perfectgoodmustforeverhatethatwhichisperfectevil,andtheneareritistoHim,themoreGodhatesit.Inawickedman,Godhatesbothsinandsinner,butinabeliever.Hehatesthesin,thoughHepitiesandlovesthepoorsinner.Heisdispleasedwithsin,thoughHepardons

sin throughChrist. Butwewill follow this no longer. Thusmuchmustsufficefortheproofandvindicationofthefirstargument.

2. If the same sins are condemned and forbidden after Christ came aswereforbiddenbeforeHecame,thenthelaw,inrespectofitsbeingaruleofobedience,isstillinforce;butthesamesinsarethuscondemnedandforbidden.Thatwhichwassinthenissinnow.Ispeakofsinagainstthemoral law.Therefore themoral law is still in force to believers as theirruleofobedience.

3. If the same duties which were enjoined in the law are commandedbelievers under the Gospel, then the law still remains as a rule ofdirectionandobedience.ButthesamedutiesarecommandedundertheGospel as were enjoined under the law, as I have already shown (e.g.Rom.13.9-10andEph.6.1).ThereforethelawstillremainsasaruleofobedienceundertheGospel.

4.Ifthethingscommandedinthelawarepartofholinessandconformityto God, and if this conformity to the law is required of us, then weconcludethatthelawisstillinforce.Butthethingscommandedarepartof Christian holiness, and conformity to the law is required of us.Thereforethelawisstillinforce.Thatthethingscommandedarepartofourholiness,Isupposeisgranted.Ifso,thatthisconformitytothelawisrequired of us, it is easy to prove. Thatwhichwe are to aspire to, andlabourfor,andafterwhichwearetoendeavourbothinouraffectionsandactions,inourprinciplesandpractices,that,surely,isrequiredofus.Butthis is all the samewith conformity to the law of God. That we are toaspiretosuchconformity inouraffections isclear fromRom.7.22,25,wheretheapostleshowsusthathedelightedinthelawofGod,andthatheservedthe lawinhismind.Nay, itwashispurpose,aim,desire,andendeavourofheart,tobemadeconformabletothatlawwhichhesaysis‘holy, just, and good’.Thoughhe fell short of it, yet he aspired after it;which shows we too are to aspire after it in our affections. And it isequally plain that we are to endeavour after conformity to it in ouractions. Take both together: ‘Thou hast commanded us to keep thyprecepts diligently.O thatmywayswere directed to keep thy statutes!Then shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all thycommandments’ (Ps. 119.4-6).Hehasrespect to theminhisheartand

affections;andheseeksconformitytotheminlifeandactions.Andthiswashisduty,becauseGodhadcommanded:‘Thouhastcommandedustokeepthyprecepts.Othatmywaysweredirectedtokeepthystatutes!’5.ItcannotbepartofourfreedombyChristtobefreedfromobediencetothelaw,becausethelawisholy,just,andgood.Surelyitisnopartofourfreedomtobefreedfromthatwhichisholy,just,andgood!Consideritinthis way: That cannot be part of our freedom which is no part of ourbondage.But obedience and subjection to themoral law in the sense Ihaveshowedwasneverpartofourbondage.Thereforetobefreedfromobedience to the lawcannotbepartofour freedom. Iwillprove that itwasneverpartofourbondage.

That cannot be part of our bondage which is part of our glory; butobedienceandconformitytothelaw,bothinprincipleandinpractice,ispartofourglory;thereforeitcannotbepartofourbondage.Again,thatcannotbe said tobepartofourbondagewhich is part of our freedom.Buttoobeythelawispartofourfreedom,aswereadinLuke1.74:‘Thatwe, being delivered out of the hand of our enemies, might serve himwithoutfear,inholinessandrighteousnessbeforehim,allthedaysofourlife.’Ishallproceednofurtheruponthis.Itisplainenough,thatthelawinthesubstanceof itremainsaruleofwalkingorobediencetotheminChrist. We shall give two or three applications and then come to thesecondmatter.

Application

(i)ApplicationagainstPapists

The foregoingwill serve toshowtheerrorof thePapists in theirunjustcharge against us that wemake it a part of our Christian liberty to beexemptedfromalllawandtoliveaswelist,andthatwearenotboundtotheobedienceofanylawinconsciencebeforeGod.WeappealtoalltheReformedChurchesintheChristianworld,whethereveranyofthemdidput forth such an opinion as this. It is the concurrent opinion of allReformedChurchesthatChristiansaresubjecttotherule,thedirection,and theauthorityof themoral law,as saysChamier: ‘Believersare freefrom the curses, not from the obligations, of the law.’ We preach

obediencetothelaw,butnotasthePapistsdo.Theypreachobedienceasameanstojustification;wepreachjustificationasameanstoobedience.Wecrydownworksinoppositiontograceinjustification,andwecryupobedienceasthefruitsofgraceinsanctification.Hethatdoesnotwalkinobedience isa strangeryet toChrist;andhe that rests inhisobediencedoesnotknowChrist.Indeed,manyaretoomuchliketheJewsstill.Godset up a law as a rule of walking, and they look for justification by it.Thesepoormenarelikeoxenintheyoke;theydrawandtoilandspendtheir strength (for who do more than those who think to earn meritthereby?),andwhentheyhaveperformedtheirlabour,theyarefattedupforslaughter.Soitiswiththese:whentheyhaveendeavouredhardaftertheir own righteousness, they perish in their just condemnation. Thesemen Luther fitly calls ‘the devil’s martyrs’: they suffer much, and takemuchpainstogotohell.Theapostletellsthemwhattheyaretoexpect:‘Forasmanyasareoftheworksofthelawareunderthecurse’(Gal.3.10),thatis,thosewhoareundertheworksofthelawforjustification;andthe apostle gives the reason, ‘for it iswritten, Cursed is every one thatcontinuethnotinallthingswhicharewritteninthebookofthelawtodothem’.Thesemenseek life indeath, righteousness in sin.And,alas,weareall tooapt to followthis line; it ishardtoperformallrighteousnessandrestinnone;hardtobeindutiesinrespectofperformance,andoutof duties in respect of dependence. We are apt to weave a web ofrighteousnessofourown,tospinathreadofourownbywhichwemayclimb up to heaven. Were it not so, what is the need for somanyexhortationsandadmonitions toperformall righteousnessbut torestinnone?TheScripturedoesnotmakeapracticeofkillingflieswithbeetles,1orcleavingstrawswithwedgesofiron;nordoesitspendmanyadmonitionsandexhortationswherethereisnoneed.

Alas, therearemultitudes in theworldwhomakeaChristof theirownworks, and this is their undoing. They look for righteousness andacceptancemore in the precept than in the promise, in the law ratherthan in the Gospel, more in working than in believing; and so theymiscarry.Thereissomethingofthisspiritinusall;otherwiseweshouldnotbeupanddownsomuchinrespectofourcomfortsandourfaith,asis still so often the case.Webecome castdownwith everyweakness inourselves. But we should be all in Christ in weak performance, and

nothinginourselvesinstrongperformances.

(ii)AgainstAntinomians

WelooknextatthecaseofthosewhoarecalledAntinomians.JustasthePapistssetupthelawforjustification,sotheAntinomiansdecrythelawfor sanctification.We claim to be free from the curses of the law; theywouldhaveusfreefromtheguidance,fromthecommandsofthelaw.WesayWearefreefromthepenalties,buttheywouldabolishthepreceptsofthelaw.TheytellusthatwemakeafalsemixturetogetherofChristandMoses,andthatWeminglelawandGospel together.Howunjustlytheylaythischargeagainstus,letmenofunderstandingjudge.Wecrydownthe law in respect of justification, but we set it up as a rule ofsanctification.The lawsendsustotheGospel thatWemaybe justified;andtheGospelsendsus to the lawagainto inquirewhat isourdutyasthosewhoare justified.Whatever they say of the law, though they castcontempt and disgrace upon it, and upon those who preach it, yet weknowthat, forthesubstanceof it, it is the imageofGod,abeamofHisholiness. The things therein commanded and forbidden are thingsmorally, and therefore eternally, good and evil; nothing can alter thenatureofthem.Thingsnotbynatureeithergoodorevilarealterablebyhimthatcommandedthem.Butthosethingswhicharemorallygoodorevil,Godcannomorealterthemthanmakeevilgood,orgoodevil.Thatwhich was morally good formerly is morally good now, and is to bepursuedandpractised.Thatwhichwas formerlymorally evil ismorallyevilnow,andistobeshunnedandavoided.WehaveaGospelrulewhichturns us to obedience to the law.We find it in Phil. 4. 8: ‘Whatsoeverthingsaretrue,whatsoeverthingsarehonest,whatsoeverthingsarejust,whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoeverthingsareofgoodreport;iftherebeanyvirtue,andiftherebeanypraise,thinkonthesethings.’AndIhopethelawisofthisnumber.Theapostletells us that the law is ‘holy and just and good’; certainly in it there isnothingcommandedbutwhatisgood.Ifwearetolearnoftheant,andfrom brute beasts, certainly are we muchmore to learn from the law,whichis the imageofGodinmanandthewillofGodtoman.WehavenothingtodowithMoses,nordowelooktoSinai,thehillofbondage,butWe look toZion, themountainofgrace.We take the lawas theeternal

ruleofGod’swill,andwedesiretoconformourselvestoit,andtobreatheout with David, ‘O that my ways were directed to keep thy statutes!’CertainlythelawandtheGospelhelponeanother;theylendoneanotherthehand,assaysPeterMartyr.

The law is subservient to the Gospel. Its purpose is to convince andhumbleus, and theGospel is toenableus to fulfil theobedienceof thelaw.ThelawsendsustotheGospelforourjustification;theGospelsendsustothelawtoframeourwayofMe.OurobediencetothelawisnothingelsebuttheexpressionofourthankfulnesstoGodwhohasfreelyjustifiedus,that‘beingredeemed,wemightserveHimwithoutfear’(Luke1.74).Though our service is not the motive or impelling cause of God’sredeeming of us, yet it is the purpose of our redemption. The apostleshowsthisatlengthinthesixthchapterofRomans;itistheapplicationhemakesof thedoctrineof free justification.He continues: ‘Therefore,brethren,we are debtors’ (Rom. 8. 12). If Christ has freed us from thepenalties,howoughtwe to subject ourselves to the precepts! IfHehasdeliveredusfromthecurses,howoughtwetostudythecommands!IfHepaidourdebtofsin,certainlyweoweadebtofservice.

Thiswasthegreatendofourredemption;Heredeemedusfrombondageandbroughtusintofreedom,fromslaverytoservice.ThatwhichChristhasredeemedus to,Hecannotbesaid toredeemus from;butHehasredeemed us unto service, and therefore cannot be said to redeem usfromservice.Indeed,Hehasfreedusfromthemannerofourobedience,butnot from thematterof ourobedience.Wenowobey, but it is fromotherprinciples,byotherstrength,untootherends,thanwedidbefore.

Previously, theprinciplesof obediencewere legal and servile, now theyarefilialandevangelical.Asthelawwasgivenwithevangelicalpurposes,soitisnowkeptfromevangelicalprinciples,principlesoffaith,love,anddelight, which causes the soul to obey, and facilitates the whole ofobedience. The love of Christ constrains (2 Cor. 5. 14), yet is theobediencefree.Loveknowsnodifficulties;thingsimpossibletoothersareeasytothemthatlove.Thegroundsofobediencediffer:heretofore,fear,nowlove.Previouslythestrengthwasourown;nowwehavefellowshipwiththestrengthofChrist.OurworksaresaidtobewroughtinGod,byunionwithHim(John3.21),andbyfellowshipwithHim.Aswecando

nothing without Him, so we can do all things through Christ whostrengthens us. And this strength He has promised: The Lord hathavouched thee this day to be his peculiar people, as he hath promisedthee,andthatthoushouldestkeepallhiscommandments’(Deut.26.18).HetellsusthatHeworksallourworksinusandforus(Isa.26.12),therequiredworksofgraceinus,andofdutyforus.

The ends before were for justification and life; now they are for otherends - to glorifyGod, to dignify theGospel, to declare our sincerity, toexpress our thankfulness. Before, we obeyed, but out of compulsion ofconscience;nowweobeyoutofthepromptingsofnature,which,sofarasitworks,workstoGod,asnaturallyasstonesmovedownwardorsparksflyupward.Thus,then,itisthatwepreachthelaw,notinoppositionto,butinsubordinationtotheGospel,asweshallshowatlengthlater.

(iii)Toallbelievers

Lastly,underthishead, letmeexhortyouall to judgeof the lawaright,andthenletitbeyourcaretomaintainit.LetnotMosestaketheplaceofChrist;but,atthesametime,makearightuseofMoses.Whenworksandobedience take their rightplace,when the law is rightlyused, then it isholy,justandgood.Butifweuseitasourlife,thenwetramplethebloodofChristunderfoot,andmakeHislifeanddeathinvain.Lettheservantfollow the Master; let Moses follow Christ; the law, grace; obedience,faith;andthenallact theirproperanddesignedparts.RememberwhatZacharias said: Youwere redeemed that youmight serve’ (Luke 1. 74),that youmight live untoHim that died for you.Reason frommercy toduty,notfrommercytoliberty.ObewarethatthegreatthingsofChristdonotmakeyoumorecareless!Takeheednottoabusemercy.Itisasadthing when Christians abuse the grace of Christ. The justice of Godprevailswithothers;oh,butGodwouldhaveHistendermerciesprevailwithyou:‘Ibeseechyoutherefore,brethren,bythemerciesofGod,thatyepresentyourbodiesa livingsacrifice’ (Rom.r2. i).Thereasoningsofsaintsare tobe fromengagementsofmercy toenlargements induty (2Cor.5.14and7.1).Havingsuchpreciouspromises,letuspurgeourselvesfromall corruptions of the flesh and spirit.None but venomous spiritswill, spider-like,suckpoison fromsuchsweets,ordrawsuch inferencesfrommercyasmaybeencouragementstosin.

Itwouldbeasadmatterifbelieversshouldgrowmoreslackandsluggish;ifthatwhichshouldquickenthemslackenstheirhands;ifamanshouldsayinhisheart,Christdied,Ineednotpraysomuch;Christhasdoneall,thereforeIneeddonothing.Thedoctrineweadvanceshouldstrengthenandnotweakenyourengagementtoduty,shouldheightenandnotlessenyourengagementtoduty;itshouldquickenandnotdeadenyourhearts’affections;itshouldinflameandnotcoolyourspirits.

Worse stillwould itbe ifwe shoulddrawarguments to sin frommercyreceived.Shouldthatbecomeaspurwhichshouldbethegreatestcurb?‘Shallwe sinbecause grace abounds?’ (Rom.6. 1). There ismercywiththee, that thoumayest be feared’, says thePsalmist (130. 4), not that Imaysin,butthatImayserve.YouwhomthelawhassenttotheGospel,lettheGospelagainsendyoutothelaw;studynowyourduty;abundanceofmercycallsforabundanceofduty.IfGodhadnotaboundedinmercy,what would have become of us? And has He abounded inmercy? Oh,then, letusaboundinduty; letusobeyforGod’ssakewhogivesusHisSon;forChrist’ssakewhohasgivenHimselfthatwemightgiveourselvestoGod; for faith’ssakewhichisdeadwithoutobedience.It is thecryoffaith,Givemechildren,elseIdie.ObeyforthesakeofyourprofessionofHisName.AdorntheGospelofourLordandSaviourJesusChrist.Whatashameifitshouldbesaidofusthatfaithcannotdothatwhichunbeliefisabletodo!WhatwillTurksandMohammedanssay- ‘Look,thesearethepeoplewhoreverenceChrist!Thesearetheservantsof thecrucifiedGod! They profess Christ and yet will forswear and will sin againstChrist!’WhatwillPapistssay?Thesearetheywhopreachfaith,andyetarestrangers toobedience, and live in sin. ‘No, let the righteousnessofthe law be fulfilled in us; let us walk not after the flesh, but after theSpirit’ (Rom. 8. 4). The law is a royal law:, If ye fulfil the royal lawaccordingtothescripture’,saysJames,‘yedowell’(2.8).Itisaroyallaw,thatwemight liveroyallyabovetheordinaryrankofmeninobedience.‘ReceivenotthegraceofGodinvain’(2Cor.6.1).Ifyoureceiveitnotinvain,youwillhavepower towill, andpower todo; youwillprizegraceand walk thankfully. It was wittily spoken by one - and there is sometruthinthesaying-‘LiveasthoughtherewerenoGospel;dieasthoughtherewerenolaw.Passthetimeofthislifeinthewildernessofthisworld

undertheconductofMoses;butletnonebutJoshuabringyouoverintoCanaan,thepromisedland.’

ThesayingagreesthusfarwithScripture.Moseswasamanofthelaw;hegave the law and he is often taken as representing the law: ‘They haveMosesand theprophets’ (Luke 16.29);There is one that accuseth you,evenMoses,inwhomyetrust’(John5.45).JoshuawasatypeofChrist;hisnamesignifiessomuch;hewasJesus,socalledinHeb.4.8:‘IfJesus’,that is, Joshua, ‘could have given them rest’. Moses must lead thechildren of Israel through thewilderness, but Joshuamust bring themintoCanaan.Sowhileyouare inthewildernessof thisworld,youmustwalkundertheconductofMoses;youmustliveinobediencetothelaw.But it is notMoses but Joshua, notworks but faith, not obedience butChrist,whomustbringyouintoCanaan.Dowhatyoucanwhileyoulive;butbesuretodierestingonChrist’smerits.

Thismustsufficeunderourfirstmainproposition;thatthesubstanceofthelawisaruleofobediencetothepeopleofGod,andthattowhichtheyaretoconformtheirlivesandtheirwalknowundertheGospel.ThiswehaveprovedbytheScriptures,byacloudofwitnesses,bytheconcordanttestimonyoftheReformedChurches.Wehavestrengthenedthisbymanyarguments,andgivensomeapplicationsofthedoctrine.

3.LawandGrace

Proposition2:TheLawIsNotIncompatiblewithGrace

The next part of our firstmain query will provemore knotty than thefirst,butifweareabletomakeitgood,itwillatoncevindicatethelaw,andoverthrowthemanyerroneousopinions thatare inconflictwith it.Our proposition is that therewas no end or use forwhich the lawwasgivenwhichwasincompatiblewithgraceandwhichwasnotserviceabletotheadvancementofthecovenantofgrace.ThisIhopetomakegood,andthenitwillbeseenhowtheGospelisinthelaw;alsothatthelawisnotthatwhichsomemenmakeitouttobe,thatis,oppositetotheGospeland to grace; for I shall show that itmay runalongwith grace, andbeserviceabletotheadvancementofgrace.

Intheprosecutionofthismatterweshallfollowthismethod:

(1)Weshall firstexplain thechiefandprincipalends forwhich the lawwaspromulgatedorgiven;

(2) We shall explain how those ends are consistent with grace andserviceable to the advancement of the covenant of grace; and thereforethattheymaycontinueundergrace;

(3) We shall answer such objections as may be raised against thisdoctrine;

(4) We shall sum up the matter in few words and make a briefapplication.

SevenPurposesForWhichTheLawWasGiven

First of all, then,my work is to show the chief and principal ends forwhichthelawwaspromulgatedorgiven.Therearetwomainendstobeobserved,onewaspolitical,theothertheologicalordivine.ThepoliticaluseishintedatbytheapostleiniTim.1.8-9:‘Knowingthis,thatthelaw

isnotmadeforarighteousman,butforthelawlessanddisobedient,forthe ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, formurderers offathers andmurderers ofmothers, forman-slayers’, etc; that is, it wasmadefortheminsuchfashionthat,ifitwerenottheirrule,itshouldbetheirpunishment.Suchisthepoliticaluseofthelaw.

Itssecondgreatpurposewasdivine,ortheological;andthis is two-fold,as seen in those who are not justified, and as seen in those who arejustified.Inthosewhoarenot justified, the lawfirstreveals theirsin tothem,humblesthemforsin,andsodrivesthemtoChrist.Inthosewhoarejustifieditactsfirstofallasadoctrinetodrivethemtoduty,nextasaglasstorevealtheirdefectssothattheymaybekepthumbleandmayflytoChrist, next as a restrainer and corrector of sin, and then again as areproverofsin(2Tim.3.16).

Imust,however,statetheprincipalandchiefendsforwhichthelawwaspromulgated:

(1) To restrain transgression; to set bounds and banks to the cursednatureoffallenman,notonlybyrevealingsin,butalsothewrathofGodagainstsin:‘tribulationandanguishtoeverysoulofmanthatdoethevil’(Rom.2.8-9).WereadinGal.3.19that ‘the lawwasaddedbecauseoftransgressions’. This Scripture Jerome and Chrysostom understand torefertotherestrainingoftransgressions.Thelawmayrestrainsinners,

thoughitcannotrenewsinners; itmayhold inandbridlesin, thoughitcannothealandcureit.BeforeGodgavethelaw,sinhadamoreperfectreign. By reason of the darkness of men’s understandings, and thesecurityof theirhearts (Rom.5. 13-14),deathreigned,andsosin, fromAdamtoMoses,astheapostleshows.ThereforeGodmightgivethemthelaw to show them, not only that they sinned in such courses as theywalked in, but to show them also that heavy wrath of Godwhich theydrew upon themselves by their sin, the effect of which might be torestrainthemintheircourseofsin,andtohindersinsothatitcouldnotnowhavesocompleteanduncontrolledadominionandreigninthesoul.Thoughitcontinuedtoreign-forrestraininggracedoesnotconquersin,though it suppresses and keeps it down - yet it could not have fulldominion.Thesinnerswouldbeinfear,andthatwouldservetorestrain

themintheirwaysofsin,thoughnottorenewthem.

If God had not given a severe and terrible law against sin, such is thevileness of men’s spirits, they would have acted all villainy. The Devilwould not only have reigned, but raged in all the sons of men. Andtherefore, aswe dowithwild beasts,wolves, lions, andothers, bindingtheminchainsthattheymaybekeptfromdoingthemischiefwhichtheirinclinations carry them to, so the law chains up the wickedness of theheartsofmen,thattheydarenotfulfilthoselustfulinclinationswhicharefoundintheirhearts.

Blessed be God that there is this fear upon the spirits of wickedmen;otherwisewecouldnotwellliveintheworld.Onemanwouldbeadeviltoanother.EverymanwouldbeaCaintohisbrother,anAmnontohissister,anAbsalomtohisfather,aSaultohimself,aJudastohismaster;forwhatonemandoes,allmenwoulddo,wereitnotforarestraintupontheir spirits. Naturally, sin is oblivious to sense and shame too. Therewouldbenostay,nobank,noboundstosin,withoutthelaw.Thereforewe have cause to bless God that he has given a law to restraintransgression,thatifmenwillnotbesogoodastheyshouldbe,yet,beingrestrained,theybecomenotsobadastheywouldbe.Wereitnotforthis,and for the awe that God has cast upon the spirits of wicked men bymeansofit,therewouldbenosafety.

The fields, the streets, your houses, your beds, would have been filledwith blood, uncleanness, murder, rapes, incests, adulteries, and allmanner of mischief. If there were no law, saying, Thou shalt do nomurder’,menwouldmakeeveryrisingofpassionastab.Iftherewerenolaw saying, ‘Thou shalt not steal’, men would think theft, deception,cheating,andoppressiongoodpolicy,andthebestlifewouldbe‘exraptovivere’(livingbyrobbery), livingbyothermen’ssweat.If therewerenolaw saying, ‘Thou shalt not commit adultery’, men would defile theirneighbour’sbed,andcommitallmannerofwickedness.

ForthesereasonsGodhasgivenalawtosetboundsandbankstodefendusagainsttheincursionsandbreachesthatsinwouldmakeuponus.Hethat sets bounds and banks to the raging sea, which otherwise wouldoverflow the land, also sets bounds and banks tomen’s sins and sinful

affections. It isno lesswonder that thedelugeof lustandcorruptioninmendoesnotbreakforthtotheoverflowingofallbanks,thanthattheseadoesnotbreak forthuponus, butHe that sets bounds to the one, alsobindsandrestrainstheother.This,then,isonepurposeGodhasingivingthelaw.

(2)Secondly,thelawwasgiventouncoverandrevealtransgression,andthis,Iconceive, isthetruemeaningoftheapostle’swords inGal.3.19:Thelawwasaddedbecauseoftransgressions’,thatis,chiefly,thatthelawmightbe‘instarspeculi’(likeaglass)torevealanddiscoversin.Thereforesaystheapostle: ‘Is the lawsin?God forbid.Nay, Ihadnotknownsin,butbythe law: forIhadnotknownlust,except the lawhadsaid,Thoushaltnotcovet’ (Rom.7.7).Theapostleseemstosay thesamething inRom.5.20:Thelawenteredthattheoffencemightabound’,thatis,thatsinmightappearexceedinglysinful.AndthisisanotherendGodhadingivingthelaw,toopen,toreveal,toconvincethesoulofsin.Andthiswaswithreferencetothepromiseofgraceandmercy.

Itwas for this reasonGodgave the lawafter thepromise, to reveal sinandtoawakentheconscience,andtodrivemenoutof themselves,andbringthemovertoChrist.BeforeHegavethelaw,menweresecureandcareless. They did not esteem the promise and the salvationwhich thepromiseoffered.Theydidnotseethenecessityforit.ThereforeGodgavethelawtodiscoversin,andbythattorevealourneedofthepromise,thatinthiswaythepromiseandgracemightbeadvanced.Ingivingthelaw,GoddidbutpursuethepurposeofmercyHehadingivingthepromise,by taking a course to make His Gospel worthy of all acceptation, thatwhen we were convinced of sin, we might look out for and prize aSaviour;whenwewerestungbythefieryserpent,wemightlookuptothebrazenserpent-inallthis,Isay,GodwasbutpursuingthedesignofHisowngrace.

(3)Thirdly,thelawwasgiventohumblemenforsin,andthisisafruitofthe former, as we have it in Rom. 3. 19-20:, Now we know that whatthingssoeverthelawsaith, itsaithtothemwhoareunderthe law:thatevery mouth may be stopped, and all the world become guilty beforeGod’, that is, sensibleof their ownguilt.Wewereno lessguiltybefore,butnowbythelawmenaremadesensibleoftheirownguilt,for,saysthe

apostle,, By the law is the knowledge of sin’. It is also written,,Wherethereisnolaw,thereisnotransgression’(Rom.4.15),thatistosay,notransgression appears where there is no law to discover it, or notransgression is charged upon the conscience where there is no law todiscoversin.ThisseemstobeexcellentlysetoutinRom.5.13-14:,Untilthelawsinwasintheworld,butsinisnotimputedwhenthereisnolaw.Nevertheless death reigned fromAdam toMoses’, etc. Themeaning is,therewasno less sin, or guilt anddeath, before the law than after; sinreigned,anddeathreignedover all the sonsofmen, and it reigned themorebecauseitreignedinthedark;therewasnolawgivenbywhichsinwas discovered and revealed to them, and to help to charge sin uponthem.Andsotheapostlesays,‘Sinisnotimputedwhenthereisnolaw’,thatis,thoughsinanddeathdidreign,yetmenweresecureandcareless,andhavingnolawtodiscoversintothem,theydidnotchargetheirownheartswith sin; they did not impute sin to themselves. Therefore Godrenewedthelaw,promulgatingitfromSinai,todiscoverandimputesintomen,tochargethemwithsin.Iwillexplainthematterbymeansofasimilitude.

Suppose a debtor to owe a great sum of money to a creditor, and thecreditor out of mere mercy promises to forgive him all the debt, yetafterwardssendsforthofficerstoarrestandlayholdofhim;itwouldbeconcludedthatthemanwasactingcontrarytohimselfandhadrepentedofhisformerpromises,whenactuallyhehadnotchangedatallandhadrepented of nothing, his only desire being that hismercymight be themoreconspicuousandevidentinthethoughtsofthedebtor;thereforeheallows him to be brought to these extremities that hemay become themorethankful.ThecaseisthesamebetweenGodandus.WearedeeplyindebtedtoGod.ToAbraham,andtousinhim,Godmadeapromiseofmercy,butmenwerecarelessandsecure,andthoughtheywereguiltyofsin,andthereforeliabletodeath,yet,beingwithoutalawtoevidencesinand death to their consciences, they could not see the greatness of themercywhichgrantedthemapardon.ThereuponGodpublishedbyMosesa severe and terrible law, to reveal sin, to accuse men of sin, and tocondemnmen for sin.Not thatGod intended that the sentence shouldtakeholdofthesinner,forthenGodwouldbeactingcontrarytoHimself,but in order that thereby guilt might be made evident, men’s mouths

stopped, and that theymight fall down and acknowledge the greatnessandrichesoffreegraceandmercy.ThusitwasinJob,asisshownfullyinJob 33. 16-31. And again: ‘The Scripture hath concluded all under sin,that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them thatbelieve’(Gal.3.22).

(4)Thelawwasgivenforadirectionoflife,aruleofwalkingtobelievers.ThisIshowedat large formerly: that thoughthe lawasaburdento theconscienceisremoved,yetitisnotremovedforpurposesofobedience.Ifit were needful, I might pursue this matter further, to strengthenbelievers. Themoral law is certainly perpetual and immutable. It is aneverlasting truth that the creature is bound to worship and obey hisCreator,andsomuchthemoreboundashehasreceivedgreatbenefits.Thisisatruthwhichisasclearasthelight,and,surely, tobefreefromobedienceistobeservantsuntosin,asalreadyshowed.

(5)The lawwasgiven,notonlyasadirectorofduties,butasaglass toreveal the imperfections inourperformanceofduties, thatsowemightbekepthumbleandvileinourowneyes,andthatwemightlivemoreoutofourselvesandmoreinChrist.ItwasgivensothatwemightflytoChristuponall occasions, as adefiledman flees to the fountain tobewashedandcleansed,forinChristthereismercytocover,andgracetocureallourinfirmities.

(6)Thelawwasalsogivenasareproverandcorrectorforsin,eventothesaints; I say, to discipline them, and to reprove them for sin. ‘AllScripture…isprofitablefordoctrineandreproof(2Tim.3.16),andthispartofScriptureespecially for theseends, tobe ‘instar verberis’ (like ascourge), to correct and chastisewantonness, and correct abeliever forsin. As says Calvin: ‘The law by teaching, warning, admonishing,correcting,preparesusforeverygoodwork.‘

(7)The lawwasgiven tobea spur toquickenus toduties.The flesh issluggish,andthelawis‘instarstimuli’(ofthenatureofaspurorgoad)toquickenus in thewaysofobedience.Thusmuch, then, for theends forwhichthelawwasgiven.

FiveReasonsWhytheLawIsNotIncompatibleWithGrace

I am next to show that there was no end for which the lawwas givenwhichwasincompatiblewithgraceandwhichmightnotbeserviceabletothe covenant of grace; therefore the law may remain in force to beserviceableundergrace.

1.Thelawwasgiventorestraintransgressions,anditisofthesameusenow.Itrestrainswickedmenfromsin,thoughithasnopowertorenewandthuschange them.Fearmayrestrain, though itcannotrenewmen.Fearmaysuppresssin, though faithaloneconquersandovercomessin.The law may chain up the wolf, but it is the Gospel that changes thewolfishnature; theone stops the streams, theotherheals the fountain;theonerestrainsthepractices,theotherrenewstheprinciples.AndwhodoesnotseethatthisistheordinaryfruitofthelawofGodnow?ItwasthespeechofaholymanthatCain,inourdays,hasnotkilledhisbrotherAbel;thatourAmnonhasnotdefiledhissisterTamar,thatourReubenhasnotgoneuptohisfather’scouch;thatourAbsalomhasnotconspiredthedeathofhisfather.ItisbecauseGodrestrainsthem.Forthisreasonwasthe lawadded,andforthispurpose itcontinues, torestrainwickedmen,tosetboundsandbankstotherageofmen’slustfulhearts.

2.Secondly,thelawwasgiventodiscoverandrevealtransgressions,andthisisnotinconsistentwithgrace;nay,itservestoadvanceit,anditstillcontinues for this end, even to discover and reveal transgressions inbelievers, tomakesinandmiseryappear,andbythatmeanstoawakentheconscience to fly toChrist.Hence theapostle says: ‘Wherefore thenserveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seedshould come to whom the promise was made’ (Gal. 3. 19). Some take‘seed’heretomeanthesaintsofGod,andmakethisthemeaning,thatsolongasthereareanytobebroughttoChrist,solongwilltherebetheuseofthelawtorevealsinbothin

the unregenerate, that theymay fly toChrist, and in the renewed, thattheymay learn todirect all their faith,hope, and expectationonChriststill.Whetherthisinterpretationholdsgoodornot,yetthisisfirmtruth,thatthelawremainswithusforthispurpose,torevealsintous.,Whereno law is, there is no transgression’ (Rom. 4. 15), that is, no sin isdiscovered; where there is no law to perform this work, sin does notappear.But‘thelawenteredthattheoffencemightabound’(Rom.5.20),

not only to bring sin to light, but tomake it appear exceedingly sinful.Thewordsof theapostleput thisbeyondallquestion, Ihadnotknownsinbutbythelaw’(Rom.7.7).Thelawwastherevealerofsintohim.Hesaysinverse13:‘Butsin,thatitmightappearsin,workingdeathinmebythat which is good; that sin by the commandment might becomeexceedingsinful.‘

Itisclear,therefore,thatthelawstillretainsthisuse;itdiscoverssininus.Thadnotknownlust,exceptthe lawhadsaid,Thoushaltnotcovet(Rom.7.7);andsimilarlywithallsins.Thisitdoes,aftergracehascome,aswellasbeforegrace;thatwhichwassinbeforeissinnow;gracedoesnotalter thenatureof sin, though itdoesset thebeliever free fromthefruitsandcondemnationofit.

3.Thirdly,thelawwasaddedtohumbleusforsin.Thisalsoagreeswithgrace,anditsusefulnessinthisrespectstillremains,thoughsomewoulddenyit.Sinisthegreatreasonforhumiliation,andthatwhichisaglasstodiscoversin,mustneedsuponthediscoveryofit,humblethesoulforit.Inrespectofthis,readRom.3.19-20andGal.3.22.InthisregarditmaybesaidthatthelawisnotagainstthepromisesofGod(Gal.3.21),‘buttheScripturehathconcludedallundersin,thatthepromisebyfaithofJesusChristmightbegiventothemthatbelieve’.Theapostlesaysthatthelawisnotagainstthepromises.Theaffirmativeinterrogationswhichheemploysarethestrongestnegations.Andheshowswhythelawisnotagainstthepromise,becauseitissubservienttothepromise.

’The law serves the cause of the Gospel’, says Chamier, because,convictingmenoftheirworksofcondemnation,itpreparesthemtoseekthegracewhichisfoundintheGospel.‘

The law concludesmenunder sin; it humbles them, convinces themofsin, that so the promisemight be given.Hence it is said inGal. 3. 24:‘WhereforethelawwasourschoolmastertobringusuntoChrist,thatwemightbe justifiedby faith.’He speaksof the same lawas ismentionedearlierinthechapter,whichseems(byverse22)tobethemorallaw.Andhowisthistheschoolmaster,butbylashingus,humblingusforsin,anddriving us to Christ? Or if it is argued that it was the ceremonial lawwhichismeantbytheschoolmaster,yetthemoral lawwastherod.The

master does little without the rod, nor the ceremonial lawwithout themoral law. It is themoral lawwhichdrivesmen to theceremonial law,which was in former days Christ in figure, as it does now drive us toChristintruth.

Thusthelawremains,aninstrumentinthehandoftheSpirit,todiscoversintous,andtohumbleusforit,thatsowemightcomeovertoChrist.Iftheavengerofbloodhadnotfollowedthemurderer,hewouldneverhavegonetothecityofrefuge,andifGoddoesnothumbleuswewouldnevergotoChrist.AnofferofChristandofpardonbeforemenarehumbledisunavailing.Mendobythisasthosedidwhowereinvitedtothesupper;theymade light of it. Just so,menmake light of a pardon, and of thebloodofChrist.ButwhenonceGodhasdiscoveredsintothem;whenthelawhascometothem,asitcametoPaul,withanaccusing,convincing,humbling, killing power. Oh then, Christ is precious, the promise isprecious,thebloodofChristisprecious.Iconceivethatthiswasthemainend for which God gave the law after the promise, to cause sinners tovaluethepromise.MenwouldnothaveknownthesweetnessofChristiftheyhadnotfirsttastedofthebitternessofsin.

4·Fourthly, the lawwasgiven foradirectionof life,andso itdoesstillremainandserve,asIhavealreadyfullyproved.Thoughwearesons,andare willing to obey, yet we must learn how to direct this willingdisposition.Isay, thoughwearesonsandareguidedby theSpirit,andthough inour love toGodweare ready for all service, yetweneed theWordofGodtobealightuntoourfeetandalanterntoourpaths.Godhasmadeussonsandhehasgivenusaninheritance;andnowHegivesusaruletowalkby,thatwemayexpressourthankfulnesstoHimforHisrich mercy. Our obedience is not the cause and ground of His act ofadoption,buttheexpressionofourthankfulnessandofthedutyweoweto God who has adopted us. God therefore did not give the rule, andafterwardsthepromise;butfirstthepromise,andthentherule,toshowthat our obedience was not the ground of our acceptance, but adeclaration of our gratitude to the God who has accepted us. Thus itremainsourruleofwalking,yet inChrist.ItmustbeourruleinChrist;wemust obey by the strength of Christ.Obedience begins fromChrist,notthatweworkforaninterestinChrist,butwegetsuchaninterestthat

wemaywork.

The law, say some of our divines,was givenwith evangelical purposes,that is, with purposes subservient to the Gospel. And I say it must beobeyed fromevangelicalprinciples,principles rooted inChrist.The lawshowsuswhatisgood,butgivesusnopowertodoit.Itis‘lexspiritualis’(aspirituallaw),holy,justandgood;butitisnot‘lexspiritus’(thelawofthespirit);thisisaloneinChrist,astheapostlespeaksinRom.8.2:‘ThelawoftheSpiritoflifeinChristJesus’.Thelawshowsuswhatisholy,butcannotmakeusholy,aslongasitisaruleoutsideofus.Itcannotmakeusholy,forthatnecessitatesarulewithinus.

Thelawisaprinciplewithinusfirst,andthenapatternwithoutus.Wearenotmadeholyby imitation,butby implantation.But thatprinciplefoundwithinsendsustothelawastotherulewithout,afterwhichwearetoconformourliveswithout.Whenthelawisonceourprinciple,itthenbecomesourpattern.

5.Fifthly, the lawwasgivenusasaglass torevealour imperfections induty, and for this purpose the law remains with us. Through it weperceivethe imperfectionsofourduties,ourgraces,andourobedience.BythismeanswearekeptclosetoChristandkepthumble.Thelawtakesus away from reliance on ourselves and casts us upon Christ and thepromises.

ThushaveweseenGod’spurposesandends in introducing the law;wehavealsoseenhowtheseendsarenotonlyconsistentwithgrace,butalsoserviceable to the advancement of thework of grace.We come next toobjectionswhichmay be raised against this doctrine, andwhen I haveanswered these I shall leave this first and main query after someapplicationofthesame.

ObjectionsAnswered

Objection(1)Thatthelawasacovenantisincompatiblewithgrace

The firstobjection I shalldealwith is this: that the lawwassetupasacovenant,andifso, itwas incontrastwithgraceand incompatiblewith

grace.

That it was introduced and set up as a covenant, certain passages ofScriptureseemtodeclare,as,forexample,Exod.19.5:‘Nowtherefore,ifyewillobeymyvoice indeed,andkeepmycovenant, thenyeshallbeapeculiar treasure unto me above all people.’ Still more plainly does itappearinDeut.4.13:‘Andhedeclareduntoyouhiscovenant,whichhecommanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrotethemupontwotablesofstone.’Andagain-Jer.31.31¬33:‘Behold,thedayscome,saiththeLord,thatIwillmakeanewcovenantwiththehouseofIsrael,andwiththehouseofJudah:notaccordingtothecovenantthatImadewiththeirfathersinthedaythatItookthembythehandtobringthemoutofthelandofEgypt;whichmycovenanttheybrake,althoughIwasanhusbanduntothem,saiththeLord;butthisshallbethecovenantthatIwillmakewiththehouseofIsrael;Afterthosedays,saiththeLord,Iwillputmylawintheirinwardparts,andwriteitintheirhearts;andIwillbetheirGod,andtheyshallbemypeople.’SoitisquotedinHeb.8.7-9 with the explanation, ‘For if that first covenant had been faultless,thenshouldnoplacehavebeensoughtforthesecond.’Theseplacesseemtospeakveryplainly,thatthelawwasgivenasacovenantofworkstotheJews.Andasacovenantofworksitwouldnotbeconsistentwithgrace,andtherefore,itisargued,therewerecertainendsforwhichthelawwasintroducedwhichwerenotconsistentwithgrace.

For the clearing of these difficulties, let it be said that divines havedistinguishedbetweenvariouskindsofcovenants.Someofthemhavesetdownthesethree:acovenantofnature,acovenantofgrace,amixedkindofcovenantconsistingofnatureandgrace.

Otherdivineshavedistinguishedthefollowing:

1. ‘Foedus natura’, or that covenant which God made with man ininnocency.

2. ‘Foedus promissi’, or the covenant of grace and promise, which wasmadewithAdamafterhisfallinthewords:Theseedofthewomanshallbruisetheserpent’shead’,andrenewedtoAbrahaminGenesis,chapter15,butmoreclearlyinGen.22.18:‘Inthyseedshallallthenationsofthe

earthbeblessed’.Sorunsthecovenantofgrace.

3.‘Foedusopen’,orthecovenantofworkswhichwasmadewiththeJews,astheyinterprettheversesalreadyquoted,Exod.19.5andDeut.4.13.

Stillothersmakethethreecovenantstobethefollowing:

1.‘Foedusnatura’:thecovenantofnaturemadewithAdam.

2.Toedusgratiae’:thecovenantofgracemadewithusinChrist.

3.Toedussubserviens’,orthesubservientcovenantwhich,theysay,wasthecovenantmadeherewiththeJewsmerelybywayofsubserviencytothecovenantofgrace inChrist,acovenantofpreparation, tomakewayfortheadvancementofthecovenantofgraceinChrist.This,theysay,asacovenant,hasalreadygone,thoughthesubserviencyofitstillremains.

Stillotherssaythattherewerenevermorethantwocovenantsmadewithman, one ofworks, the other of grace, the first in innocency, theotherafter the fall.Yet, theyadd, thiscovenantofgracewasdispensed to theJews in such a legal manner that it seems to be nothing else but therepetitionofthecovenantofworks.Inrespectof this legaldispensationofit,thesamecovenantunderthelawiscalledacovenantofworks,butundertheGospelwithitsclearermanifestationsitiscalledacovenantofgrace.These then, they claim,werenot twodistinct covenants,butoneandthesamecovenantdifferentlydispensed.

That the law couldnot be a covenant ofworks in the true sense of theterm,isshownbythefollowingarguments:

(1)Icannotconceivethatthatcouldbecalledacovenantofworksunderwhich a holy God is married to a sinful people - but by the covenantdescribed in Jer. 31-33, God was married to such (‘although I was anhusbanduntothem’).Thereforeitcouldnotbeacovenantofworks.

(2)Thatcouldneverbesaidtobeacovenantofworkswhichhadmercyinittosinfulmen,butthiscovenanthadsuchmercy.Itwassetupwithmercifulpurposes,insubserviencetotheGospel,astheapostleshowsatlengthinGalatians,chapter3.

(3)Ifthelawwasgivenasacovenantofworks,thenitwouldbeoppositeto,andcontraryto,thepromise;buttheapostleshowsthatthisisnotso:‘IsthelawagainstthepromisesofGod?Godforbid’(Gal.3.21).Butifitweresetupasacovenantofworks,thenitwasdiametricallyoppositetoit;forifsalvationisofworks,thenisitnotofgrace.

(4) That can never be a covenant of works which was added to thecovenantof grace;but theapostle shows that the lawwas added to thepromise (Gal. 3. 19). If it hadbeen added as a covenant, then itwouldoverthrowthenatureofthepromise.Butitwassoaddedthatthenatureofthepromisemightbepreserved.Butifanythingofworkswerehere,itwould clean overturn grace, and overthrow the nature of the promise.Therefore it was not added as a covenant, nor was it added as aningredientofthepromise,asifjustificationwastocometomanpartlybyworkingandpartlybybelieving,forthiswouldoverthrowthefreenessofthepromisespokenofinRom.11.6:‘Ifsalvationbeofworks,thenisitnomoregrace’.Butitwasaddedbywayofsubserviencytothepromise,astheapostlesays:‘Itwasaddedbecauseoftransgressions’.Itwassoaddedto the promise, or covenant of grace, as to help and advance it, notsubvertanddestroy it.Therefore itcouldnotbeaddedasacovenantofworks.

(5)A fifthargumentmaybe taken fromGal. 3. 17:The law,whichwasfourhundredandthirtyyearsafter(thepromise),cannotdisannul,thatitshouldmakethepromiseofnoneeffect.’But ifGodhadintroducedthelawasacovenant, itwouldhavedisannulledthepromise.ItwouldalsohavedeclaredGodtobechangeable,whichcannotbe,for,astheapostlesays,‘Godisone’(Gal.3.20);HeisthesameinHisgraceandpurposetosinners, even thoughHe seems, by giving the law after the promise, torepentofHisformermercy,andbythismeanstocancelorrepealwhatHehaddonepreviously.Yetitisnosuchmatter,forGodisone;Heisthesame inall.This covenantwasestablishedbyoath (Heb.6. 17-18), andwhenGodswears,Hecannotrepent(Ps.110.4).IfGodset thisupasacovenantafterHehadgiventhepromise,eitherthiswouldhaveshowedmutability inGod’swill, or contradiction inHis acts, which cannot be.Thereforethelawcouldnotbeacovenantofworks.

(6)If itwereGod’spurposetogive lifeandsalvation to the lostsonsofmenbyacovenantofgrace,thenHeneversetupthelawasacovenantofworks for that end.But thiswasHis purpose, as the apostle tells us inGal.3.18:‘Iftheinheritancebeofthelaw,itisnomoreofpromise;butGodgaveittoAbrahambypromise.’Asifhehadsaid,ItwasneverGod’spurposetogivelifebythelaw,forHehadgivenitbeforeinanotherway,namely,bypromise.Thereforeitwasneverintendedbywayoflaw.

(7) If the law were a covenant of works, then the Jews were under adifferent covenant fromus, and so nonewere saved,which the apostlegainsays:,WebelievethatthroughthegraceoftheLordJesusChristweshallbesaved,evenasthey(theGentiles)’(Acts15.11):orelsetheyareboth under a covenant ofworks and a covenant of grace. But this theycouldnotbe,astheyarebothutterlyinconsistenttheonewiththeother.

(8)Godneverappointsanythingtoanendtowhichthethingappointedis unserviceable and unsuitable. But the law was utterly unserviceableandunsuitabletothisend,togivelifeandsalvation:theapostletellsusthelawcouldnotdoit(Rom.8.3).AlsoinGal.3.21:‘Iftherehadbeenalawgivenwhichcouldhavegivenlife’,whichimpliesthatitcouldnotdoit,andthereforeGodneverintroduceditforthatpurpose.

(9) ItcouldneversuitwithGod’sheart tosinners togivea covenantofworks after the fall; because man could do nothing; he was dead andpowerless.Besides,itwascontrarytothenatureofacovenant;manwasimpotentandcouldnotstandasapartyincovenantwithGod.

Besides,ifthenatureofacovenantofworksisconsidered,itwillbeseenquiteplainlythatitisimpossibleforthelawtobeacovenantofworks:

(a) The covenant of works is a covenant between two friends. It is acovenant of friendship. But God could notmake such a covenant withfallen man. We were enemies, we were guilty sinners; therefore acovenant of friendship could not be made. Indeed, there might be acovenantofgracemadewithman,forthatisacovenantofreconciliation,andsuchacovenantmightbemadewithenemies;buttherecouldnotbea covenant ofworksmade, for that is a covenant between friends, andsuchwewerenotafterthefall.

(b) The covenant of works was a covenant wherein each party had hiswork. It was a conditional covenant; man had something to do if heexpected to receive thatwhichwaspromised.But sucha covenantGodcould notmakewithman afterman’s fall, forman could notmeet theleastofitstermsorperformthemeanestofitsconditions.Therefore

(c)Thecovenantofworkswasacovenantnowaycapableofrenewal.Ifmanoncebrokeit,hewasundoneforever.ButthecovenantwhichGodactually made with man was capable of being renewed, and menfrequently renewed covenantwithGod.Therefore this couldnotbe thecovenant ofworks. Plainly, then, itwas not a covenant ofworkswhichGodmadewiththeJews.

Objection(2):That the lawisnot thecovenantofgrace,nora thirdcovenant,andmustthereforebeacovenantofworks.

Butanobjectormaysay:Acovenantitwas,andsoitiscalled.Ifso,itiseitheracovenantofworks,oracovenantofgrace,orelse‘daturtertium’(given as a third), that is, a third, ormiddle covenant. But there is nomiddlecovenant,norisitacovenantofgrace;thereforeitmustneedsbeacovenantofworks:

Ianswer: Ifbya thirdcovenant ismeantamiddlecovenant, consistingpartlyofworks,andpartlyofgrace,underwhich theJewswereplaced,andbywhichtheyweresaved,Iutterlydenyanysuchcovenant.Fortherewasno such covenant evermadewith fallenman, neither can there beanymiddlecoursebetweenworksandgrace.Theapostlesaysplainly:‘Ifofworks,thenisitnomoregrace’(Rom.n.6).Ifmanhadbeenrequiredtodoanythingtohelpintheprocuringoflife,thoughneversosmall,andif the Gospel had provided all the rest, yet it would still have been acovenant ofworks, andutterly inconsistentwith the covenant of grace.For,asAugustinesays,‘Gracecannowaybecalledgrace,ifnoteverywaygrace.’ If therewasanythingofman’sbringing,whichwasnotofGod’sbestowing,thoughitwereneversosmall,itwouldoverturnthenatureofgrace,andmakethatofworkswhichisofgrace.Ifamanshouldaskbutapennyofusforthepurchaseofakingdom,thoughheshouldgiveustherest,yetwouldthatpennyhinderitfrombeingameregiftandgrace.Soitishere.AndthereforeIcanbynomeansallowamiddlecovenant.

TherearetwootheropinionswhichIwillheremention.Somementhinkitneitheracovenantofworks,noracovenantofgrace,butathirdkindofcovenantdistinctfromboth.Othersthinkitacovenantofgrace,butmorelegallydispensed.

Thosewhoconsiderittobeathirdcovenantspeakofitasapreparatory,or a subservient covenant, a covenant that was given by way ofsubserviency to the covenant of grace, and for the setting forward oradvancing of the covenant of grace. Thosemenwhohold this view saythattherearethreedistinctcovenantswhichGodmadewithmankind-the covenant of nature, the covenant of grace, and the subservientcovenant.

ThecovenantofnaturewasthatwherebyGodrequiredfromthecreatureas a creature perfect obedience to all divine commandments, withpromiseofablessedlifeinParadiseifmanobeyed,butwiththethreatofeternaldeathifhedisobeyedthecommand,thepurposeofallthisbeingtodeclarehowvirtuepleased,andsindispleasedGod.

The covenant of grace was that whereby God promised pardon andforgivenessofsinsandeternallife,bythebloodofChrist,toallthosethatshould embrace Christ, and this was purposed by God to declare therichesofHismercy.

The subservient covenant, whichwas called the old covenant, was thatwhereby God required obedience from the Israelites in respect of themoral, ceremonial, and judicial laws. Blessings in the possession ofCanaan were promised to obedience, and curses andmiseries to thosewho broke the covenant, and all to this end, that God might thusencouragetheirheartsintheexpectationoftheMessiahtocome.

ThissubservientoroldcovenantisthatwhichGodmadewiththepeopleof Israel inMountSinai, toprepare them to faith, and to inflame themwith the desire of the promise and of the coming of Christ; also itwasmeant tobeas itwereabridleof restraint,and towithhold them fromsin,untilthetimecamewhenGodwouldsendtheSpiritofadoptionintotheirhearts,andgovernthemwithamorefreespirit.

Thiscovenant,ofwhichthemoral lawissaidtobeapart,andwhichiscalled here the subservient covenant (under which were the Jews), isdescribed by the writer who propounds it, to be a third and distinctcovenant,mid-waybetween thecovenantofnatureand thecovenantofgrace.Inhistreatiseonthematterhestatesthepointsofdifferenceandagreementwhichheseesbetweenitandthecovenantsofnatureandofgrace. Take first the differences and agreements with the covenant ofnature.Theagreementsarethese:

1.Inboththesecovenants(i.e.ofnatureandofsubserviency),onepartycovenantingisGod,theotherisman.

2.Bothcovenantshaveaconditionannexedtothem.

3. The condition is, in general, the same—’Do this and live’. 4. Thepromiseis,ingeneral,thesame-ParadiseandCanaan.

Thesearetheagreements.Iwillnowshowthedisagreements:

1. The covenant of nature was made with all men, the subservientcovenantwiththeIsraelitesalone.

2.Thecovenantofnaturebringsus toChrist,not directly by itself, butobliquelyand‘peraccidens’(accidentally);buttheoldorthesubservientcovenantbringsustoChristofdeliberateintentand‘perse’(ofitself),forthiswasthetrueandproperscopewhichGodaimedatinthegivingofit.‘God did not make the covenant of nature with man, that he, beingburdenedwith theweightof it, shouldgo toChrist. Ingiving that,Godaimed at this, to have that which was His due from man. But in thissubservientcovenantGodrequiresHis right fornoother end than thatman,beingconvincedofhisweaknessandimpotency,mightflytoChrist.‘

3.Thecovenantofnaturewasmadewithman, thatby itmenmightbecarriedonsweetlyinacourseofobedience,foritwasengravenontheirhearts. But the subservient covenant was made that men might becompelledtoyieldobedience,foritdidnaturallybegettobondage(Gal.4.24).

4.Thecovenantofnaturewastobeeternal,butthissubservientcovenantwasbutforatime.

5.Thecovenantofnaturehadnorespecttotherestraintofoutwardsins,neitherinitsprincipalnorlesseruses,buttheoldcovenantinits lesseruseshadthisinview,asexplainedinExod.20.20.

6.Thecovenantofnaturewasengraved in theheart,but theotherwaswrittenontablesofstone.

7. The covenant of nature was made with Adam in Paradise, but thesubservientcovenantatMountSinai.

8.Thecovenantofnaturehadnomediator;thesubservientcovenanthadMosesforamediator.

9.Theonecovenantwasmadewithmanperfect,theotherwithapartofmankindfallen.

Thesearestatedtobethemainagreementsanddifferencesbetweenthecovenantofnatureandthissubservientcovenant.Wecomenowtoshowthedifferencesandagreementswhichithaswiththecovenantofgrace:first the points of agreement: God is the Author of both, both arecontracted with fallenmen, both reveal sin, both bringmen to Christ,botharecontractedbyamediator,inboth,lifeispromised.

Theirpointsofdifferenceareasfollows:

1.Inthesubservientcovenant,Godisconsideredascondemningsinandapprovingonlyofrighteousness,butinthecovenantofgraceHeisseenaspardoningsinandrenewingholinessinfallenman.

2.Theydifferinthestipulationorconditionattachedtoeach:thatintheoldcovenant runs, ‘Do thisand live’; that in thenew, ‘Believeand thoushaltbesaved’.

3.Theydiffer in age.Thepromisewasmoreancient than the law. It isrecordedthatthelawwasaddedtothepromise,andthat,fourhundredandthirtyyearsafterthepromisewasgiven(Gal.3.17).

4.The subservient covenant restrainsman,butby coercionand slavishrestraint;butthecovenantofgraceworksinhimawillingandchild-likeinclinationofspirit,sothatobedienceisfreeandnatural.

5.Inthesubservientcovenant, thespiritofbondageisgiven,but inthecovenantofgracetheSpiritofadoptionisgiven.

6. The old covenant terrified the conscience; the covenant of gracecomfortsit.

7.Theobjectoftheoldcovenantwasmanasleep,orrathermandeadinsin;oftheother,manawakened,andhumbledforsin.

8.Theoneshowsthewayofservicebutgivesnostrengthfortheservice;theotherbothshowsthewayandgivesthepowertoserve.

9. Both covenants promise life, but the one in Canaan, the other inheaven.

Ihave thusexplained theopinionofcertaindivineswhich, though theydo not seem to meet all difficulties, are nevertheless reasonable. Themainreasonunderlyingtheopinionseemstobethis.Thelawissaidtobea covenant, as I have showed from various Scriptures, and if so, it iseitheracovenantofworks,orofgrace,orelseathirdtypeofcovenant,neitheroneofworksnorofgrace.

Itcannotbeacovenantofworks,asIhaveexplainedatlengthpreviously,fortherewasaformercovenant,acovenantofgrace,made,andthiswasbutaddedtoit,notbywayofoppositiontoit,butbywayofsubserviency.Besides,thiscovenant,beingbroken,wascapableofrenovation,whichacovenantofworksisnotcapableof.Andagain,whentheyhadbrokenit,theywerenottothinkthecasehopeless,buthad libertyofappeal fromthe law to the Gospel, from God’s justice offended to God’s mercypardoningandcoveringtheirsin,aswefindthepeoplefrequentlydoingwhen they implored mercy and pardon for His Name’s sake: ‘For thyname’s sake forgive, and for thy name’s sake cover our transgressions’;underwhichexpressionsChristwasdarklyforeshadowed.

Again, if it had been a true covenant of works, a covenant of life anddeath, then could they have had nomercy, no pardon, butmust needshave perished. But against this the apostle speaks:, We believe thatthrough the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, we shall be saved, even asthey’(Acts15.11).Nay,andthen itwouldhavebeenutterly inconsistentwith the covenantof grace; therewouldhavebeen someendsandusesforwhichthelawwaspromulgatedwhichwerealtogetherdestructivetothepromiseandcovenantofgrace.ButIhavealreadyshowedthattherewere no such ends. Therefore itmust be concluded that it was such acovenant as did not stand in contradiction to the covenant of grace;therefore itcouldnotbeacovenantofworks.If so,say thesedivinesofwhomIamspeaking,thenitmustbeeitheracovenantofgrace,orsomekindofthirdcovenant.

But they say that it could not be a covenant of grace either. For ourdivinesingeneralreckonthistobeonepartofourfreedominChrist,thatwearefreedfromthelawasacovenant,andifthelawwereacovenantofgrace, onlymore legally dispensed and administered after amore legalmanner,itmightseembettertosaythatwearefreedfromthisaspectofitratherthantosaywearefreedfromitasacovenant.Therefore,iftheysaywearefreedfromitasacovenant,itcannotpossiblybeheldtobethecovenantofgrace.Thisseemstobethereasonunderlyingthisopinion.

Ifitbeneitheracovenantofworks,noracovenantofgrace,thenmustitof necessity be a third kind of covenant: and it must needs be such acovenantasdoesnotstandinoppositiontograce,norisinconsistentwiththe covenant of grace, for if this be not so, then God will havecontradictedHimself,overthrownHisownpurpose,andrepentedofHisownpromisewhichHehadgivenbefore.Henceitiscalledasubservientcovenant.ItwasgivenbywayofsubserviencytotheGospelandafullerrevelationofthecovenantofgrace;itwastemporary,andhadrespecttoCanaan and God’s blessing there, if and as Israel obeyed. It had norelationtoheaven,forthatwaspromisedbyanothercovenantwhichGodmade before He entered upon the subservient covenant. This is theopinionwhichImyselfdesiremodestlytopropound,forIhavenotbeenconvinced that it is injurious toholinessordisagreeable to themindofGodinScripture.

There is,however,asecondopinioninwhichI findthatthemajorityofourholyandmostlearneddivinesconcur,namely,thatthoughthelawiscalled a covenant, yet itwasnot a covenant ofworks for salvation; norwasitathirdcovenantofworksandgrace;butitwasthesamecovenantin respect of its nature and design under which we stand under theGospel,eventhecovenantofgrace,thoughmorelegallydispensedtotheJews. It differed not in substance from the covenant of grace, but indegree,saysomedivines,intheeconomyandexternaladministrationofit, say others. The Jews, they agree, were under infancy, and thereforeunder ‘a schoolmaster’. In this respect the covenant of grace under thelawiscalledbysuchdivines,foedusvetus’(theoldcovenant),andundertheGospel ‘foedus novum’ (the new covenant): seeHeb. 8. 8. The onewas called old, and the other new, not because the onewas before theotherbythespaceoffourhundredandthirtyyears,butbecausethelegaladministrations mentioned were waxing old and decaying, and wereready to disappear and to give place to a more new and excellentadministration. ‘Thatwhichdecayethandwaxethold is ready tovanishaway.’ The one covenant wasmore obscurely administered, shadowed,darkenedwithshadows;theotherwasadministeredmoreperspicuouslyandclearly.Theonewasmoreonerousandburdensome,theothermoreeasyanddelightful.Theonethroughthelegalmeansofitsadministrationgenderedtobondage,theothertoson-likefreedom.AllthismaybeseenclearlyinCol.2.17;Heb.10.1;Gal.3.1-4.3.Hence,asAlstedtellsus,thenewandoldcovenants,thecovenantsofthelawandGospel,arebothofthem really covenants of grace, only differing in their administrations.ThattheywerevirtuallythesamecovenantisallegedinLuke1.72-75:toperform themercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holycovenant’.Whatwas,hisholycovenant’?Itismadeclearinverse74thatin substance it was the same as the covenant of grace: ‘That he wouldgrant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemiesmightservehimwithoutfear, inholinessandrighteousnessbeforehim,allthedaysofourlife’.

Forbrevity’ssakeIwillgiveasummaryofthethoughtsofthosedivineswhomaintainthissecondopinion.Theyassert:1.Therewerenevermorethan two covenants made with mankind, which held out life andsalvation; the first was the covenant of works, made with man in

innocency;theotheristhecovenantofgrace,madeafterthefall.

2.Therewasbutonewayofsalvation,oneonly,sincetheFall,andthatwasbyacovenantofgrace;GodneversetupanothercovenantofworksaftertheFall;Hesetsusnowtobelieve,withoutworkingforlife.

3·Nevertheless,allAdam’sposteritylieunderthecovenantofworks,asAdamleftthemafterhisfall,untiltheycomeovertoJesusChrist.

4. The law was never given as a covenant of works, but added to thepromisebywayofsubserviencytothecovenantofgrace.

5.Thoughthelawwasgivenwithmercifulpurposes,andassubservienttothecovenantofgrace,yetitseemstoreachmanasthoughitweretherepetition of another covenant of works under which man stands. Orrather, the covenant of grace under the Old Testament seems to be sopresentedasifitwerestillacovenantofworkstoman.Anditisworthyofobservationthatthecovenantofgrace,likethesuninthefirmament,asitrisestoitszenith,becomeseverclearer.FromAdamtoMosesitwasverydarkandobscure;fromMosestothetimeoftheprophetslightbegantoappear. The light was clearer still when John the Baptist began hisministry. Then came the ministry of Christ Himself, when there weremoreclearandgloriousmanifestationsof thecovenant, forHerevealedthe bosom counsels of His Father. After Christ’s resurrection and thesending of the Holy Spirit, the book previously clasped became fullyopened,thathethatrunsmayread.Hencesomehavecalledthecovenantof grace before Christ’s coming, ‘foedus promissi’ (the covenant ofpromise);andnow,undertheGospel,thecovenantofgraceinrespectofits full, clear, and ample unfolding. The shadows which obscured it informer times have been taken away, and the whole platform of God’sdesigntosavemanbysheergraceissoclearlyrevealedthathethatrunsmayreadit.

Objection (3): That as the covenants of law and of grace are opposites, the lawcannotbelinkedwithgrace

Wenow come to dealwith the third objection raisedby some,namely,that that which stood upon opposite terms to the covenant of grace

cannotbedescribedasacovenantofgrace,butmustneedsbeacovenantofworks.Butthelawstooduponsuchoppositeterms;thereforeitmustbeacovenantofworks.TowhichIanswerthus:

Thatthelawstooduponoppositetermsismanifest,forinonecasethereisthecommandtodo,intheothertobelieve:asisfound,forexample,inLev. 18. 4-5: ‘Ye shall domy judgments and keepmine ordinances, towalktherein:IamtheLordyourGod.Yeshallthereforekeepmystatutesandmy judgments:which if aman do, he shall live in them: I am theLord.’ And again in Ezek. 20. 11: ‘And I gave them my statutes, andshewed themmy judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live inthem.’AndagaininGal.3.12:Thelawisnotof faith:butthemanthatdoeththemshallliveinthem.‘

But thesepassagesmaybe thusexplained.TheWorddoesnot say: ‘Hethat doeth them shall live by them’, but ‘shall live in them’.We live inobedience, but we do not live by obedience. There is much differencebetweenthetwostatements.

Lestthisdifferenceshouldbeevaded,seeitplainlyrecordedinRom.2.13:‘FornotthehearersofthelawarejustbeforeGod,butthedoersofthelawshallbe justified.’That theapostle speakshereof themoral lawheshowsinverses21and22wherehediscoursesofcertainbranchesofthemoral law. Likewise in Rom. 10. 5-11: ‘For Moses describeth therighteousnesswhichisofthelaw’(hedoesnotsay‘bythelaw’), ‘thatthemanwhichdoeth those thingsshall liveby them.But therighteousnesswhichisoffaithspeakethonthiswise…whosoeverbelievethonhimshallnotbeashamed.’Sothatthelawseemstostanduponoppositetermstograce.Thisistheobjectionwhichispresented,andwhichIhaveshowninallitsfulness.Ifthiscanbecleared,thenallisdone.

NowagainstallthisImightopposevariousotherScriptureswhichseemtospeakagainstit,forinstance,Gal.3.11:‘Butthatnomanisjustifiedbythe law in thesightofGod, it isevident; for the justshall liveby faith.’Again,Gal.3.21: ‘If therehadbeena lawgivenwhichcouldhavegivenlife,verilyrighteousnessshouldhavebeenbythelaw.’Thatis,ifthelawhadbeenable to justify and save anyman,Godwouldneverhave sentChrist.But,bythedeedsofthelawthereshallnofleshbejustifiedinhis

sight’(Rom.3.20;seealsoPs.143.2).‘Asmanyasareoftheworksofthelaw are under the curse’ (Gal. 3. 10). If, then, all who look for life byobedience to the lawareunder thecurse,surelyGoddidnotsetupthelawtotheendthatweshouldhavelifebyobediencetoit.Thelawenteredthatsinmightabound’,saystheapostle,andifthelawwasgiventoshowthe full extent of sin, and the greatness of sin, then surely there is nopossibility thatman shouldbe justifiedby it.Besides, itwasgiven fourhundredandthirtyyearsafterthepromise.Godgavethepromiseoflifeand justificationpreviously to faith, and if afterwardsHehadgiven thelawso thatmanmighthave lifebyworking, thenHewouldhaveactedcontrary to Himself. He would have shownHimself changeable in Hispurpose, as if He repented of His former mercy. But this cannot be;thereforetheothercannotbe.

Besides, God could not expect men to work that theymight have life,because the promise of life was given before they could do any work.Christsaid,‘Withoutmeyecandonothing’.WehavenolifeoutofChrist;Heisourlife.‘HethathaththeSonhathlife,andhethathathnottheSonhathnotlife.’‘ThatIcome,howeverfeebly,toThee’,saidChrysostom,‘isnotpossible exceptbymeansofThee.’Deadmen cannotwork.Weareincapableofworking thatwemight live. Indeed, inChristwearemadealivethatwemightwork.

Again,Godneverpurposedtogivelifetomanuponman’sobedience,forHe had decreed another way to confer life uponman, as may be readplainly inGal.3. 11where theapostle isdebating thisverymatter: ‘ButthatnomanisjustifiedbythelawinthesightofGod,itisevident.’Andhowisitevident?Because,sayshe,‘thejustshalllivebyfaith’.Itisasifhehadsaid,Godhasdecreedanotherwaytolife,andthereforesurelytheformerisnottheway.

Yet theobjectormay say, It seemsas if the lawdid requireus towork,andpromiseduslifeforsodoing;andifso,thencertainlythelawstandsuponoppositetermstograce,andthereforecanbeneitheracovenantofgrace,norsubservienttoit.Andiftheydonotstanduponoppositeterms,howshallweunderstandtheScripture,‘Dothisandlive?’

Inanswertothisobjection,Iwilllaydownsixorsevenparticularmatters

forconsideration:

(1) ‘Dothisand live’hasnotreferenceto themoral lawonly,buttotheceremoniallawalso(asinLev.18.4-5),whichwastheirGospel.Thiswillespeciallyappearifwelookupontheceremoniallawnotasanappendixtothemorallaw,butasitbearsatypicalrelationtoChrist,justaseverylamb slain in sacrifice pointed to Christ, and said, ‘Behold the Iamb ofGod that taketh away the sin of the world’. The Gospel was darklyadministeredandshadowedforthintheceremoniallaw.

(2)‘Dothisandlive’wasnotspokenofthelawabstractlyandseparatelyconsidered, but of the law and the promise jointly; not of the lawexclusively, but of the law inclusively, as including thepromise, and ashavingthepromiseinvolvedwithit.

(3)Goddoesnotbidmen.Doandlivebydoing,butDoandliveindoing.We may live in obedience, though we do not, and cannot, live byobedience.Wecouldnot livebydoing, tillwehadlife;but life isnotbydoing, but by believing, asChrist says, ‘Yewill not come tome that yemighthavelife’;here,clearly,itwasnotbyworks,butbygrace.‘Iftherehadbeenalawgiventhatcouldhavegivenlife’-eitherlife,thatwemightobey,orlifeuponourobedience-‘verilyrighteousnessshouldhavebeenbythelaw.’

(4)SomewritersthinkthatGod,afterHehadgiventhepromiseof life,andtendered lifeuponbelieving,repeatedthecovenantofworks in thelaw, to put men upon the choice of being saved by working or bybelieving.This,theysay,Goddid,soastoemptythemofthemselves,andteachthemthefollyofthinkingthattheycouldobtainlifebyobedience.ThereforeGodputsthemtothetrial;andlesttheyshouldthinkthatanywrong was done to them. He gives them a repetition of the formercovenant,andasitweregivesthemthechoiceofbeingsavedbyworking,or saved by believing. Then, convinced of their own impotency, theymight better see, admire, adore, and glorify themercy ofGodwho hasgivenapromise,andsentaChrist,tosavethosewhowerenotabletodoanythingtowardstheirownsalvation.

(5)Othersthinkthat‘Dothisandlive’hasreferencemerelytoatemporal

and prosperous life in the land of Canaan. If the people would beconformabletothelawwhichGodhadgiventhem,andwouldobeyHimin His commands, then should they live, and live prosperously, in thelandofCanaanwhichHehad given them:Hewould bless their basketandstore,andgivethemmanyotherblessings,aslistedinDeuteronomychapter28.

(6)Another interpretation is this: that ‘Do this and live’, though itwasspokentothepeopleofIsraelinperson,didnotterminatewiththem,butthroughthemwasspokentoChrist,whohasfulfilledallrighteousnessforus,andpurchasedlifebyHisownobedience.

Someof these sixpoints I reject entirely, and I cannotheartily gowithanyofthem,butIstatethemtoshowthevarietyofinterpretationswhichhavebeenpropounded.Iwillgivebrieflymyownthoughtsofthematter.

Igrantthat,viewedexternally,thelawandtheGospeldoseemtostanduponoppositeterms.Buttheseseeminglyoppositetermshad,inthecaseofthelaw,endssubservienttoChristandgrace.Forthetermsofthelawwere intended to awaken men, and convince them of their ownimpotency, to humble them for their impotency, and to drive them toChristforsalvation.IfwelookuponthelawseparatelyfromtheGospel,itdoesseemtostanduponoppositeterms.Ifwetakeittomeanthatmanmustworkforsalvationandlife,thencertainlyitisagainstthepromisesofGod.Buttheapostledealswiththismatterwhenheasksthequestion,‘IsthelawagainstthepromisesofGod?’,towhichhereplies,‘Godforbid.’Hencewemust not look upon the law separately from theGospel.Wemustlookuponitrelatively,asithasrespecttothepromise,andthentheseeminglyoppositetermsofthetwocovenantswillbeseen,inthecaseofthelaw,tohaveendssubservienttothepromiseandgrace.AsissaidbyPeterMartyr:ThelawandtheGospelgiveusinturntheirhand.’Thelawby showing us our helplessness causes us to go over to Christ and thepromise for life. We have already seen that this was the differencebetweenthecovenantmadewithmanininnocencyandthatwhichGodrequiredinthelaw.Intheformer,Goddidnotrequireobediencesothatmanmight become burdened with the rigour ofHis requirements andfleetoChrist.ItwassimplyGod’saimtoreceivethatwhichwasHisduefromman.But in the law,God’s solepurpose is to requireHis right so

thatmanmightbecomeconvincedofhisweaknessandhelplessness,andflytoChrist.Sothat,although‘Dothisandlive’seemstobeagainstthepromise, yet ifwe lookat the endwhichGodhad in view in giving thelaw,toconvincemanofhisimpotency,tohumblehimforit,andtodrivehimaway fromallhope inhimself, thenwe can see a sweet agreementandsubserviencyofthelawtothepromise.

Jeromepropounds a seeming contradiction, yet it is true in both of itsparts:‘Cursedishethatsaith,Godcommandsimpossibilities.Andcursedis he that says. The law is possible. ’ This seems strange. Did not Godcommandthelaw,andisnotthelawpossible?Itistruethatitisso.ButGod did not command the law with the expectation that we could orshouldfulfilit;wewerenotabletoobeyit,norcouldithelpustodoso.Bothof these impossibilitiesareseen inRom.8.3: the fleshwasweak,thereforethelawwasweak.ButGodspokethewords,,Dothisandlive’,toshowusourweaknessandtostirupourheartstoseekChrist,whohasfulfilled all righteousness for us, both positive and negative. He hasundergonethepenalties,andobeyedtheprecepts,borneourcurses,andperformedourservices.

ThecoursethatChristtakeswiththerichyoungrulerisveryobservable,andfullyproveswhatIhavebeensaying.ItisrecordedinMatt.19.16-22:‘Good Master’, says he, ‘what good thing shall I do, that I may haveeternallife?’Herewashisquestion.Christ’sanswerisinthelatterpartofverse17:‘Ifthouwiltenterintolife,keepthecommandments’.Thiswasastrangeanswer.Wasthelawaway?Ifso,whyhadChristcomeintotheworld?Andwastheyoungmanabletokeepthelaw?Thatisimpossible,asRom.8.3assuresus;anddoesnottheapostlesay,‘Asmanyasareoftheworksofthelawareunderthecurse,foritiswritten,Cursediseveryonethatcontinuethnotinallthingswhicharewritteninthebookofthelawtodothem.’Strangeanswertherefore!Christdidnotsay,asinotherplaces. If thou wilt enter into life, Believe; but here, ‘Keep thecommandments’.Yet ifwe lookuponthepersontowhomChristspoke,andthepurposeofthesaying,weshallseethemeaning.Thepersonwasaproudruler,onepuffedupwiththeproudnotionthathehadkeptthewholelawandthereforeoughttohavebeensavedbythelaw,ashesaysafterwards;‘AHthishaveIkeptfrommyyouthup’.ThereforeChristsets

himuponfulfillingthelaw,notasaninstrumentofjustification(forHeanswersthesamequestionotherwiseinJohn6.28-29),butthathemayfindinthelawaglasstorevealtohimhisimperfectionsandimpotency,and that, being humbled by it, he might seek unto Christ for life andsalvation.

When men will be saviours of themselves, when they look forrighteousness by the law, Christ bids them go and keep thecommandments (servandamandata),and thisHedoes tohumble themandtobringthemtoHimself.But ifmenarehumbledandbrokenbyasightof their sins, then,withoutmentionof the lawatall,Hecomfortsthemwiththefreepromisesofgrace,saying:‘Comeuntome,allyethatlabourandareheavyladen,andIwilleaseyou’,andagain.TheSpiritofthe Lord is uponme to preach liberty to the captives, to set at libertythem that are bruised’, and so on. The afflicted one’, says Calvin, ‘iscomfortedby thepassingbyof the lawandbymentionof the graciouswordofpromise.’

So then toconclude: Iconceive theoppositionbetween the lawand theGospeltobechieflyofman’sownmaking.MenshouldhavebeendriventoChristbythelaw,butinsteadtheyexpectedlifeinobediencetoit.Thiswas theirgreat errorandmistake. Itprovedashard to turn them fromseeking life by their own righteousness and obedience to the law, as toforce thesun fromthesky. Idonot think,however, that they imaginedtheycouldachieve righteousnessby themoral lawalone, for there theycould not help but see that it was an impossibility, but they hoped toobtain it by joining the ceremonial lawwith themoral. God had giventhem these laws, and had often said, ‘Do this and live’. Therefore theyhoped by subjection to them to have life. Andwhat they lacked in themoral,theytriedtomakeupintheceremonial;theywoulddosomethingofwhatthemorallawcommanded,andgototheceremoniallawforwhattheycouldnotdo.Notthatalldidthis,yetmanyofthemdidso.

ButthiswasfarfromGod’spurpose.Itwastheirownerrorandmistake,astheapostleseemstoimplyinRom.10.3-4:‘TheyhaveazealofGod,but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’srighteousness,andgoingabouttoestablishtheirownrighteousness,havenot submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.’ They went

aboutit,butcouldnotattainit.Allthiswasbutsettingadeadmanonhisfeet; and thisarose from their ignorance, their errorandmistake.Theydidaspoorignorantsoukdowithus;webidthempray,webidthemobeyandperformduties; and, poor souls, all they do, they dowith the ideathattheycantherebyjustifythemselves.Theyspinathreadoftheirownrighteousnessinwhichtoapparelthemselves.Poorsouls,theycanthinkofnothingbutworkingthemselvesintolife.Whentheyaretroubled,theymust lick themselves whole. When they are wounded, they run to thesalveofdutiesandthestreamsofperformances,andChristisneglected.Sohardit is tobe induty inrespectofperformance,andoutofduty inrespect of dependence! This is a thing beyond their reach, to do allrighteousness,andyettorestinnonebutChrist.SaysthePsalmisttotheLord: ‘Iwillmakementionof thy righteousness, evenof thineonly’(Ps.71.16).And this isourcase, too, forChrist ismade tous,wisdom,andrighteousness(1Cor.1.29).

ThushaveIansweredthefirstgreatquery,andtheobjectionsthatarosefromit.Iwouldlaydownthesetwopositionsasfirmconclusions:

1.Thatthelaw,forthesubstanceofit,remainsasaruleofobediencetothepeopleofGod,andthattowhichtheyaretoconformtheirwalkundertheGospel.

2.Thattherewasnoendoruseforwhichthelawwasgiven,butsuchaswas consistent with grace and serviceable to the advancement of thecovenantofgrace.

4.ChastisementsforSin

Query2:AreChristiansfreedfromallpunishmentsandchastisementsforsin?

IfweexaminetheScriptures, theyseemtoholdout this teaching tous,that God’s people, those whose sins are pardoned, may yet bearchastisementsforsin.Thattheyhaveatsundrytimesbeenundertherod,the corrections and chastisements of God, is plain. Abraham, Moses,David, and indeed all were; and the apostle tells us: ‘If ye be withoutchastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and notsons’ (Heb. 12. 8). God scourges every son He receives. That thesecorrections have been inflicted on them for sin, the Scripture seems toteachinLam.3.39-40:‘Whereforedothalivingmancomplain,amanforthe punishment of his sins? Let us search and try our ways, and turnagaintotheLord.’AlsoinMicah1.5:‘ForthetransgressionofJacobisallthis,andforthesinsofthehouseofIsrael.’AlsoinMicah7.9:‘IwillbeartheindignationoftheLord,becauseIhavesinnedagainsthim.’Nay,itislaiddownasaconditionwhichmustofnecessityprecedeGod’sremovalofcalamitiesfromthem,thattheyweretohumblethemselvesforsin,andturn from sin before God will deliver them. Thus the Lord speaks toSolomon(2Chron.7.14),andthusalsodowereadinLev.26.41:‘Iftheiruncircumcised hearts be humbled, and they then accept of thepunishmentof their iniquity, thenwill I remembermycovenant. ‘Whatdoes thismean?This: that if theywould justifyGod inHis proceedingagainst them, if they would lie down in the dust and own theirpunishment, and say that their sins deserved it; if they wouldacknowledgeGod’sjusticeinafflictingthem;thenwouldGodrememberHis covenant andhelp them.All thiswasdoneby the princes of IsraelwhentheywerepunishedbythehandofShishakofEgypt(2Chron.12.6).Itissaid,Theyhumbledthemselves,andsaid.TheLordisrighteous’,that is. He justly afflicts us for the sin that we have committed. Thisproves that theywere punished for their sins; for theywere to humblethemselves for sin under affliction, if they were to justify God in Hisdealingswiththem;surely,then,Godafflictedthemforsin.

But against this it may be said that this was spoken of the wholecongregation,andnotofthosealonewhoweregodly.Igrantthis,yetthegodlythemselvesweretoperformthesamedutiesastherest;theyweregrantednoexemption;theytooweretohumblethemselvesforsin,aswefind Daniel and Ezra doing. And if sin was not the cause, and if thecalamitieswerenotinflictedonthemforsin,thentheywouldhavebeenactinganuntruth.TohumblethemselvesforsinasthecauseofthegoingoutofGod’shandagainstthem,andtoacceptofthepunishmentoftheiriniquity, even while they declared that God was righteous in it, wouldindeedhave been acting anuntruth ifGodwas not actually chasteningthemforsin,andsuchactingwecannotallow.

Yet, admitting that thiswas spokenof theentire congregation,wehaveotherScripturesasevidence thatGodhaspunishedHisownpeople forsin, including His choicest ones. Moses and Aaron were shut out ofCanaan;Godwouldnotallowthemtoenterthelandofpromise.Thiswasagreataffliction;andinNumbers20.12itismadeclearthatthecauseoftheirexclusionwassin,becausetheyhadnotsanctifiedGodatthewatersofMeribah.‘Becauseyebelievedmenot,tosanctifymeintheeyesofthechildrenofIsrael,thereforeyeshallnotbringthiscongregationintothelandwhichIhavegiventhem.’

David, theman afterGod’s ownheart, asGodHimself says, is anotherinstanceofGod’schastisementofagodlyman.Hischilddies,thesworddoesnotdepartfromhishouse,hisownsonrisesupinrebellionagainsthim.Theseweregreatcalamities.TheScripturedeclaresthatthecauseofthemwashissin,hisactofmurderandhisadultery:,Nowthereforethesword shallneverdepart from thinehouse; because thouhast despisedme,andhasttakenthewifeofUriahtheHittitetobethywife’(2Sam.12.10).

DoesChastisementPertaintotheOldTestamentOnly?

ButagainstthisitmayandwillberepliedthatthesewereexamplesundertheOld Testament, and therefore do not prove our contention, for thegodlynowliveunderadifferentcovenant.TothisIanswerasfollows:Ihavealreadyexplainedthatsomedivinesdistinguishbetweenthreekinds

ofcovenant-acovenantofnature,acovenantofgrace,andasubservientcovenant.ThislastwasthatwhichwasmadewiththeIsraelitesatSinaiandwascontained in themoral, ceremonial,and judicial laws. Itwasacovenantwhich,thoughitstooduponoppositetermstothecovenantofgrace,servedthepurposesofthecovenantofgracesubserviently.Itwasacovenant which God made with Israel when they were to enter intoCanaan, and it had chief respect to the good or evilwhichwould comeupon them in that land. In it God promised blessings upon obedience,andthreatenedcalamitiesandjudgmentsonthemiftheydisobeyed.Allthis is setoutclearly in the twenty-eighthand twenty-ninth chaptersofDeuteronomy.Yet,asIhaveexplained,itwassubservienttothecovenantofgrace,forwhentheysawthattheywereneitherabletoobtainlifeandoutward mercies, nor to ward off death and temporal evils, by theirobediencetoit,theyweretolookforthepromiseofgraceandtolongforthecomingoftheMessiah,andtoexpectall theseuponbettergrounds.Into thiscovenant theyall entered,andbound itwitha solemnoath toGod,anda curse, as is shown inDeut. 29. 12 and 19.God forHispartengagedHimselftoblesstheminthelandofCanaanwhithertheywent,iftheyobeyedHiscommands;Healsothreatenedtopunishthemthere iftheyfailedtoobeyHim.Toallthistheysubscribed,andbounditwithanoathandacurse.thereforesomeinterpretthewords,‘Dothisandlive’,asiftheymerelyhadrespecttotheirwell-beinginthelandofCanaan,andduringthislife.

I have read a story of the Sadduceeswho denied the resurrection, andconsequently, I suppose, the immortality of the soul. They were menskilfulinthelawandobservantofit,thoughtheyheldthisgreaterror.Acertainman,observingtheirkeepingofthecommandments,askedthemwhytheykeptthem,seeingtheydeniedtheresurrectionandafuturelife.Theyanswered:Inorderthatitmightgowellwiththeminthislife,thattheymight inherit temporalblessingsby theirobedience to them. Iwillnotsaythattheyservedtheendofthelawinthis,forcertainlyGodgavethelawforhigherends.ButthisImaysay,thatitispossibletheyservedtheendofitbetterthanthemanwhoaskedthequestion.Itmaybethatthequestionerwaskeepingthelawtobejustifiedbyit.WereadofsuchaspiritinRom.10.3-4wheretheapostlespeaksofsomewhothoughttheywouldbejustifiedbyobediencetothelaw,andthatwasfurtherfromthe

mindofGodingiving it thanwasthemotiveof thosewhokeptthe lawthatitmightgowellwiththeminthislife.FortheformerthereisnotatittleofsupportintheBookofGod,butforthelatterthereseemsmuch.We read of something to this purpose in the fifth commandment:‘Honourthyfatherandthymother,thatthydaysmaybelonginthelandwhichthougoesttopossess.’Thereissomethingofit,too,inthesecondcommandment,andagreatdealmoreinDeut.26.16-19,andthroughoutthe whole of its twenty-eighth chapter; though under these temporalblessingsspiritualthingswereshadowedandapprehendedbythosewhowerespiritual.

It is true, the things that were commanded or forbidden weremorallygood or evil, and therefore of perpetual obligation. Yet the terms onwhichtheyseemtobecommandedorforbidden,andonwhichthepeopleobeyed(prosperityorcalamity,goodorevil, inthe landofCanaan),areclean gone. Yet, while the terms lasted, the people were said to breakGod’scovenantbytheirdisobedience.Thiscannotmeanthecovenantofgrace,forthatcannotbebroken;itisaneverlastingcovenant,likethatofthewatersofNoah(Isa.54.9).Thecovenantofgracedoesnotdependupon our walk and our obedience; it is not made upon our goodbehaviour. Obedience might be the end, but it was not the ground ormotiveGodhad inmaking it.Norcould itbea covenantofworkswithreference to life and salvation, for that, once broken, is not capable ofrenewalandrenovation.ButthecovenantunderwhichtheIsraeliteswereputwasasubservientcovenant.

IonlysuggestthisandamnotperemptoryinrespectofitButIdonotseethat it will involve us in any difficulties. But (and this is the greatestconcessionthatcanbeallowedtoobjectors),admittingthattheIsraeliteswereunderadifferentcovenant,andthatitwasofthecharacterwehavejustexplained,yettheywereunderacovenantofgracealso,aswellaswe.Thatsurelywillbegranted;fortheapostlespeaksplainlyofitinActs15.11:‘WebelievethatthroughthegraceoftheLordJesusChristweshallbesaved,evenasthey.’

Withoutdoubt,thereweresomewhowereGod’schoicepeople,whowerenotonlyunder,butin,thiscovenantofgrace,andyettheywerechastisedand afflicted for sin - Moses, David and Hezekiah are examples. This

objectioncannotthereforeoverthrowourproposition,namely, thatGodafflictsHisownpeopleforsin.

I have already noticed the cavil that the persons I have instanced ashavingbeenchastenedforsinaretakenfromtheOldTestament,andthattherefore they do not apply to the case as it stands now; but such anattitudeactuallyisfullofdanger,andwouldleadtomoredifficultiesthanatfirstappear.TheharmonyofScripturemustbepreserved,foritisoneway to discover the truth on doubtful points, and it is thework of theministers of the Gospel, their great work, to unfold and preserve thisharmony,and to show thatonepartof theWorddoesnotquarrelwithand clash against another. The two Testaments are always in sweetharmony and full agreement. God is the same in both; and had wewisdom, we should see the mutualness, the harmonies and theagreements,eveninthoseplacesthatseemtobeopposites.

NewTestamentTeachingaboutChastisement

ButinthismatterIshallmeetthecavillingofopponentsbyshowingthattheNewTestamentdoesnothingbutconfirmtheOldTestamentonthismatterofchastisement:IthinkWeshallfindthatbothTestamentsspeakthesamelanguageinthismatter.

IbeginwithiCor.11.30:Forthiscausemanyareweakandsicklyamongyou, andmany sleep.’ The apostle here tells them of the fearful sin ofprofaningtheLord’sTable,andofpartakingoftheordinanceunworthily.Finallyhe tells themthat, though theydidnot takenoticeof it,yet thiswasthegreatcauseofthesickness,weakness,anddeathwhichGodhadinflictedonthem,andwhichnowreignedamong them.For this cause’,says he, by which he signifies an unworthy partaking. Can there be aclearerproofofwhatIamassertingthanthis?Herewefindafflictionandpunishment set down, and here is the sin set down; and lest all thisshould not be enough, he tells them plainly that for this sin is thispunishment—‘Forthiscausemanyaresick’.

ButitmaybeobjectedthatthiswasnotspokenofGod’speople,butthatthose ofwhom it is spokenwere unworthy partakers of the sacrament;God’speoplecannotbeunworthypartakersofthesacrament.

In explanation of this matter, observe that there is a twofoldunworthiness, the unworthiness of the person, the unworthiness ofpresentdisposition.Theunworthinessofthepersonisseenwhenamancomeswithouttheweddinggarment,unjustified,unsanctified.AfterthisfashionGod’speoplecannotbeunworthy for theyarenot found in thisstateofunworthiness.

Butthereisalsounworthinessofpresentdisposition,orofthemannerofpartaking of the Supper,whenwe do not comewith those dispositionsand affections which are required in such an ordinance. Habitualpreparation there may be, and at the same time the lack of actualpreparation,whichconsistsofself-examination,andtheexcitationofourgraces,astheapostlespeaks:,Letamanexaminehimselfandsolethimeat of that bread anddrink of that cup’; lack of this actualpreparationmaymakeamananunworthy receiver.A similar thingmaybeseen intheprayerofHezekiah:ThegoodLordpardoneveryonethatpreparethhis heart to seek God, the Lord God of his fathers, though he be notpreparedaccordingtothepreparationofthesanctuary’(2Chron.30.18-19). They had habitual preparation (their heartswere prepared to seekGod),buttheylackedactualpreparationaccordingtotherequirementsofthesanctuary.ThusmayGod’speoplehavehabitualpreparationbutyetmaylacksacramentalpreparation.

ThattheCorinthianswereGod’speoplemaybeseenfrom1Cor.11.32:‘WearechastenedoftheLord,thatweshouldnotbecondemnedwiththeworld.’ Itwasnotapunishment,butachastisement, a termpeculiar tosaints,andthepurposeofitwasthattheymightnotbecondemnedwiththeunbelievers.Thisplace then isclearenoughon thematter.Wenowlookfurther.

LetusturntoRom.8.10:,IfChristbeinyou,thebodyisdeadbecauseofsin’.Heretheapostleshowsthatdeathistheresultofsin,andthoughaman be in Christ, yet he must die because of sin; sin brings death. AsayinginHeb.12.6-8speakstothesameeffect:‘Hescourgetheverysonwhomhereceiveth:whatsonishewhomthefatherchastenethnot?’Andwhydoeshechastisehisson?Becauseheisason?No,thatcannotbethereason. It is because he is a sinner. Correction, though not invariably,

here surely implies an offence. So, too, in 1Pet. 4. 17: ‘JudgmentmustbeginatthehouseofGod.’Withthis,compareRev.2.12-16,whereit issaid to the angel of the Church at Pergamos (of whom God gives thistestimony,thathehadkepttheNameofChrist,andhadnotdeniedthefaithofChrist)thatthereweresomesinsamongthem,andthattheLordbadethemrepentof them, lestHeshouldcomeandfightagainst them.Thisshowsthattheirsinswouldbringcalamityiftheyrepentednot.

And again, in 1 Cor. 10. 5-12: ‘With many of them God was not wellpleased:…neitherbeyeidolaters,asweresomeofthem…allthesethingshappened unto them for ensamples, and they are written for ouradmonition,uponwhom theendsof theworldare come.’Andhowarethey admonitions to us, if we are not to share with them in the samestrokesifwegoonwiththeminthesamesins?

VariousCavilsAnswered

ThushaveIcalledyourattentiontosomepartsofScripturewhichseemtoholdoutthistruthfirmlytous,thatGod’speoplemaybechastisedforsin,andthatGoddoeschastiseHispeopleforsin.Nowweshallasktheobjectorstoshowustheirstrength,sothatwemayseewhethertheycanstandagainstthestrengthandclearnessofthistruth.Wewilllookfirstatsomeoftheircavils,whicharetheirforlornhope,andthenweshalllookatthemainbodyoftheirarguments,andshallkeepstrengthinreservetobringtobearafterwards,thustomakethevictoryoftruthmorecompleteandperfect.Whatthenaresomeoftheircavils?

God,theysay,doesnotafflictHispeopleforsin,butchastisesthemfromsin,andtheyadd:thefatherdoesnotgivehischildmedicinetomakehimsick,buttotakeawaybadhumours,topreventorremovediseases.

This I regardasamerecavil.Afflictionshave respectboth to timepastandtimetocome.GodbothafflictsHispeopleforsin,andchastisesthem(to use the cavillers’ phrase) horn sin. The father not only corrects hischildtomakehimbewareoffallingintothefault inthefuture,butalsofor the fault already committed.He does it to bring him to repentanceandsorrowforhisfault,andtoworkoutofhimthedispositiontoit.Or(tousetheirownsimilitude),hegiveshimmedicine,nottoincreasehis

badhumours,buttoremovethem.Wegrantit,andwesay,Godchastisesforsin;notto increasesin,but toremovesin.Butweaddthis, that thereasonafathergiveshissonmedicineisbadhumours,for if therewerenobadhumourstherewouldbenoneedofmedicine.Likewise,sinisthecauseof theaffliction; if therewerenosin, theremightbenoaffliction.And if a fathermay givemedicine for the purging out of bad humoursbeforetheyactuallybreakout,andmuchmoreforthecorrectionofthemandthecureof themwhentheydobreakout,so it isspiritually.IfGodmay afflictmen for the purging out of a sinful disposition,muchmoremayHecorrectthemfortheactualbreakingoutofsininconsequenceofthis disposition. The mistake of the objectors lies here, that they lookuponafflictionsmerely asmedicine, and thisdoesnot truly answer thecase.Afflictionsarebothmedicinesandrods.Theyarecalledrods(asinMicah 6. 9; Job 9. 34; Lam. 3. 1) because they correct us for sincommitted,andmedicinestopreventsininthefuture.Butifamanlooksupon them asmedicine only, let him remember thatmedicine has twopurposes:first,topurgeoutourpresentdistemper,whichteachesusthatafflictions are for sin; second, to promote our future health, whichteachesusthatafflictionsarefromsin.

Asecondcavilisthis,thatweconfoundthings,andregardthatasacausewhich is but an occasion for chastisement, God, they say, may takeoccasion from sin to chastiseHis people, when yet their sin is not thecause of the chastisement. For instance, consider David’s sin innumbering the people of Israel. When he did this, God brought apestilenceuponIsrael.David’ssin,saythecavillers,wasnotthecauseofthe pestilence; Israel’s sin was the cause; David’s sin was but theoccasion;foritissaidin2Sam.24.1:‘TheangeroftheLordwaskindledagainst Israel, and he moved David against them, to say, Go, numberIsraelandJudah.’GodhaddispleasureagainstIsrael,andDavid’ssinwasnotthecauseofprocuring,buttheoccasionwhichGodtooktoinflictthisjudgmentonthem.ThesamemaybesaidofHezekiah’ssiningloryinginthe richesofhis treasureand theabundanceofhis store, asappears inIsa. 39. 2.He showed all his riches to the ambassadors from Babylon,uponwhichactofprideandvaingloryGodsent theprophet to tellhimthat,ashehadtherebytemptedGod,soalsohadhetemptedanenemyandshowedhimwherehemighthaveabootyifhewouldonlycomeand

fetch it. And that indeed would be the issue of thematter, for all thistreasure and show of strengthwhich he had revealedwould be carriedintoBabylon.NowthisparticularsinofHezekiah, forwhichGodseemstothreatenthiscalamity,wasnottheactualcauseofit,butattheworstitwas but an occasion for it. Therefore it is a greatmistake in these andother places to make out those things to be causes which are butoccasions.Suchisthecavilwhichweareinvitedtoanswer.

BeforeIanswer,letmesaythatIwishthecavillerswerenomoreguiltyofconfoundingthingsthanweare.Certainlythewantofclearconceptionsofthingshasbeenthegroundofthosemistakesanderroneousopinionswhichtheyhaveputforth.Butwewillnotrecriminate,butproceedtotheanswer.

Wegrantasmuchasthis,thatthisorthatparticularsinmaysometimesbesaidrathertobetheoccasionthanthecauseofaffliction.Buttothisweaddthatsinisnotonlyanoccasion,but it isoftentimesacause,notonly of chastisement in general, but of this or that particular act ofchastisement.As is seen in iCor. 11.30: ‘For thiscausemanyareweakand sickly, andmany are fallen asleep.’ See also Ps. 39. 11. As for thecases cited by the cavillers, I conceive that they will afford them littlesuccess.As for the caseofHezekiah, I amso far from thinking thathisparticular sin was the cause, that I will not even admit it to be theoccasionofthecalamitiesthreatened.Igrantittobetheoccasionoftheprediction, but not of the punishment. By reason of his sin, God takesoccasiontoforetell thecalamitywhichHehaddecreed,but thiswasnooccasioneitherofthedecreeitselforoftheevildecreed.Asfortheothercase,thatofDavid,itwasnotmerelyanoccasiontaken,buttherewasanoccasiongivenbyDavid’s sin. Itwasnotonlyanoccasion,buta cause,too.IfIsrael’ssinwasthedeservingcause,David’ssinwastheimmediateandapparentcause.IfIsrael’ssinprocuredtheaffliction,David’ssingavethe finishing and concluding stroke.Not only his sin in numbering thepeople, but the omission of the duty which God required, which was:,When thou takest the sumof the children of Israel after theirnumber,thenshalltheygiveeverymanaransomforhissouluntotheLord,whenthounumberest them; that therebenoplagueamong them,when thounumberest them’ (Exod. 30. 12-15). This being omitted, God brought a

plagueonthem.

This is all I shall say for answer to these cavils which aremade. I willcomenexttotheirmainbodyofarguments.

MainArgumentsAgainstChastisementStatedandAnswered

Theirfirstargument,wherebytheywouldprovethatGoddoesnotpunishforsin,isthis:IfGodtakesawaythecause,thenHetakesawaytheeffectalso.Sinisthecauseofallpunishment,punishmentistheeffectofsin.IfGodtakesawaythecause,namely,sin,thentooHetakesawaytheeffect,whichisthepunishmentofsin.Ifthebodyisremoved,theshadowgoestoo.Sin is thebodyandpunishmenttheshadow;takeawaythesinandthepunishmentmustneedsbetakenaway.Thisseemstobe implied inthat phrase which is used in Scripture for the pardon of sin: ‘I willremember your sinsnomore’, that is, never to condemn you for them,nor tocharge themagainstyou,noryet topunishyou for them.WhereGod pardons sin, there He forgives the punishment. This seems to begranted in the thing itself, thepardonof sin.What is thepardonof sinbuta removingofguilt?What isguiltbutanobligationandbindingusovertopunishment,spiritual,temporal,eternal?Therefore,ifGodtakesawaytheguiltofsin,thendoesHetakeawaythepunishmentalso.

Inanswertothisargument,itisnecessarytodistinguishbetweenvariouskinds of punishments - temporal, spiritual, and eternal. As for eternalpunishment, all are agreed that it can never lay hold on those whomChrist has set free, that is to say, those whose sins are pardoned. Inrespect of spiritual punishments, as they have relation to, or aresubordinateto,eternalpunishment,sowearefreedfromthemalso.Notonlyso,butwearelikewisefreedfromalltemporalpunishmentsasfarastheyarepartofthecurseforsin,andasfarastheyaresatisfactionsforsin, either satisfaction by way of purchase or satisfaction by way ofpunishment; for God’s justice, both vindictive and rewarding,commanding and condemning, is satisfied. Further, believers are freedfrom temporal punishments as they are the fruits of sin, or as merelypenal,fortothisextentaretheypartsofthecurse,andsoareinflictedon

wickedmen,butnotuponthegodly,allofwhosetroublesarefruitful,notpenal, troubles. As far as temporal punishments are the effects ofvindictive justice, and not of fatherly mercy, believers are freed fromthem.GodhasthoughtsofloveinallHedoestoHispeople.Theground,themanner,theendofallHisdealingswiththemislove,thatHemaydothemgood andmake thempartakers ofHis holiness (Heb. 12. 10) andhereaftermakethempartakersofHisglory.

But there isanotherargumentwhichImustanswer. It is this: IfChristhasbornewhateveroursinsdeserved,andbydoingsohassatisfiedGod’sjusticetothefull,thenGodcannot,injustice,punishusforsin,forthatwouldbetorequirethefullpaymentfromChristandyetdemandpartofitfromus.Therefore,therecanbenotemporalpunishmentsforsin.

I grant thatGod’s justice is fully satisfied in Christ.He can require nomore that what Christ has already done and suffered. Abundantsatisfactionhasbeenmade.Therefore,farbeitfromanytosaythatGodchastisesHischildrenfortheirsinsasameansofsatisfyingHis justice.Christ having done that has left nothing for us to bear by way ofsatisfaction.ThePapistsindeedsaythatoursufferingsaresatisfactions,and therefore they punish themselves and submit to penances. But noProtestant divines say so. We say that God does not chastise us as ameansof satisfaction forsin,but for rebukeandcaution, tobringus tomournforsincommitted,andtobewareofthelike.

It must always be remembered that, although Christ has borne thepunishment of sin, and although God has forgiven the saints for theirsins, yet God may God - fatherly correct His people for sin. Christendured the great shower of wrath, the black and dismal hours ofdispleasure for sin. That which falls upon us is a sunshine shower,warmthwithwet,wetwiththewarmthofHislovetomakeusfruitfulandhumble.Christdrankthedregsofthatbittercup,somuchofitaswoulddamnus,and leftonlysomuch forus todrinkaswouldhumbleus foroursin.Thatwhichthebelieversuffersforsinisnotpenal,arisingfromvindictive justice, but medicinal, arising from a fatherly love. It is hismedicine, not his punishment; his chastisement, not his sentence; hiscorrection,nothiscondemnation.Inbrief,then,God,forvariousreasonsmay chastise the saints for those sins for which Christ has rendered

satisfaction,andwhichHeHimselfhasforgiven.Augustinenamesthreesuchreasons-thedemonstrationofman’smisery,theamendmentofhislife,andtheexerciseofhispatience.Ishallgivefivereasons:

FiveReasonsWhyGodChastensHisPeople

(i)Godmaydoitfortheterrorofwickedmen,thattheymayreadtheirdestinyinthesaints’miseries.Ifitbethusdonewiththegreentree,whatshall becomeof thedry tree? If it thus befall the sheep of Christ,whatshall become of the wolves and the goats? If God deals thus with Hisfriends, what shall become of His enemies? If judgment begins at thehouseofGod,whereshallthewickedappear?

(2)GodmaydoitforthemanifestationofHisjustice,thatHemayshowtotheworldthatHeisjust.IfHeshouldpunishothersforsin,butspareHisown,wickedmenwould say thatHewaspartial, thatHe respectedpersons. Therefore, to declare that He is just and impartial, He willchastiseHisown.

(3)Godmaydoittoremovescandal.Thesinsofthesaintsbringscandaluponreligion;theirsinsarethesinsofpublicpersons;everyonestandsformany.GodwasmoredishonouredbyDavid’suncleannessthanbyallthe filth of Sodom. The ways of God were blasphemed thereby, as theprophet tells him; and upon that ground, because he had given theoccasion,Godwouldchastisehim(1Sam.12).

(4)Again,Hemaydoitforcautiontoothers.Others’woesshouldbeourwarnings;others’sufferingsoursermons,andstandingsermonstoustobeware of the like. God chastises lest sin should spread to others. TheapostleshowsthisatlengthiniCor.10.5-12.Lot’swifewasturnedintoapillarofsalttoseasonus.

(5) God also chastensHis people for their own good here, and for thefurtheranceoftheirsalvationhereafter.Asfortheformer,itistohumblethem themore for their sin.When sin comes clad and arrayed with across or sad affliction, then it works the more deeply for humiliation.Afflictionsdrawmen’sthoughtsinward.It iswiththegodlyasit iswiththewicked;sometimestheyhaveacarelessearthatcanhearindictments

againstsin,andyetnotlaysintoheart.Therefore,Godopenstheirearbydiscipline.Intheirmonthyoushallfindthem(Jer.2.24).God’shouseofcorrectionisHisschoolofinstruction.Whenanafflictioncomesuponus,then we are ready to listen to the indictments of sin, the checks ofconscience,andthereproofsofGod,andbecomereadytoabaseourselvesand humble ourselves under them. Such is one end in divinechastisements.Anotherendistodrawtheheartfurtherfromsin.Anotheristopreventthelike.Oursufferingswillbeourwarnings.Menwhohavefeltthestingoftheserpent,inafflictionforsin,willbewareofthespawnoftheserpentinthepollutionofsin.Wereadthat,beforetheBabyloniancaptivity, thechildrenofIsraelwereeverandanonfalling into idolatry,andthewholecreationwasscarcelylargeenoughforthemtomakeidolsof.Theycouldscarcelyfindenoughcreaturestomakeidolsof.ButafterGodoncecarriedthemcaptiveintoBabylon,andscourgedthemsoundlyfor their idolatry, amid all their sins afterwards they never returned toidolatry.Eventothisdaytheyabhorpictures.

Many other reasons for the chastisements of believers might be laiddown,butthechiefisthatGodchastisesthemtomakethempartakersofHis holiness here and of His glory hereafter; and, indeed, to sweetenheavenandglorytothem.ThephilosopherZenosoughttormenttoassisthimtogetthemostoutofpleasureandsaidthatpleasureswerenothingworth if they were not thus seasoned: ‘from the disagreeable to theesteemed,fromthornstoroses,fromcommotionstopeace,fromstormstotheharbour, fromthecross to thecrown’.Theapostle’swordsare tothesameeffect: ‘Our lightafflictionwhich isbut foramomentworkethforusafarmoreexceedingandeternalweightofglory.‘

ConcludingConsiderations

Ishallproceednofurtherwiththeseunhappydifferencesbetweenus,butbefore I conclude this answer will add a few thoughts worthy ofconsideration.

1.Sindoesnaturallybringeviluponus.Asthereispeaceandgoodinthewaysofholiness,sothereisevilandtroubleinthewaysofsin.Theyareneverseparated.Trouble is thenaturalandproper fruitof sin, the fruit

which it naturally bears. Evil lies in the very bowels of sin. Sin is auniversalevil,abig-belliedevil.Allevilsarebornofsin.Ifyoucouldripupsinyouwouldfindallevilwithinit.Alltheevilinpunishmentliesintheevilwhichattendsuponsin.All theCommandmentsweregiven forgood,andourgoodliesinobediencetothem.HethatbreakstheboundsthatGodsets,necessarilyrunsintoevilandtrouble.Sinisbornfromourhearts,andtroubleisbornfromsin.Troubleisastrulyachildofsinassin is the natural issue of our souls. Not only by consequence and byGod’sordination,butnaturally,sinbringsforthevilandtrouble.

2.Theevilthatsinbrings,andthetroublethatcomesbysin,iseitherbychance or by providence and Divine dispensation. But it cannot be bychance. Job tellsus so, and surelyhe tells the truth: ‘Afflictionsdonotariseoutofthedust’(Job5.6),andChristsaysthat:‘Therecannotahairfallfromyourhead’,withoutaprovidence(Matt.10.29-30).Andifnotahair, ifnot thesmallest thingwithoutaprovidence, thenmuch less thegreatest.AugustinesaysthatGodarrangesthevariouspartsofthebodyofafleaoragnat.Sothen,theevilthatcomesbysinisnotbychance,butbyprovidenceandDivinedispensation.

3. If evil arises from providence, then either it is fromGod’s active orfromHispassiveprovidence,or,ifyoupreferitthisway,fromeitherHispermissiveprovidenceorbyHisactiveordainingprovidence.Theformer-permissiveprovidence-doesnotsowellsuitwithGod,who isallact,norwiththewordsof theprophet: ‘Shall therebeevil inacity,andtheLordhathnotdoneit?’(Amos3.6).Understandthatthisismeantonlyoftheevilofpunishment,notoftheevilofsin,inwhichGodhasnohand.Therearemany thingswhichGodpermits in theworld,whichHedoesnotdo; theseare theevilsofsin.But theevilsofpunishment, theseHepermits and does too. Isaiah gives the same answer as Amos in thismatter: ‘WhogaveJacob fora spoil, and Israel to the robbers?Didnotthe Lord, he against whom we have sinned?’(Isa. 42. 24-25). We see,then,thatallthesecomefromDivinedispensation.Godbringsthisevil,andHetellsus,too,thatitisonaccountofsin.

4.IfGodinHisprovidencebringseviluponHispeople,theneitherit isoutoflove,oroutofanger,oroutofhatred.Itcannotbeoutofhatred,for that were an impossibility; there is nothing that God does to His

people that is the fruit or effect of hatred. Indeed, afflictions on thewicked are the fruits of hatred, droppings before the great shower ofwrath falls upon them;but it is not sowithHis ownpeople. Then it iseither out of love or out of anger. Certainly it is not out of anger apartfromlove,fortheprinciple,theground,theendofallHisdealingswithHispeopleislove.ThereisnothingHedoestothemwhichisseparatedfrom His love; there is love in all. Nay, it is from love that thechastisementsproceed: for all hisways areways ofmercy to them thatfearhim (seePs. 25. 10).Butbecause afflictions and chastisements areevils, and seem to be the works of one who is angry and displeased,therefore I say that, though they come from love, yet it is from lovedispleased, from love offended. Paul says: ‘God had mercy onEpaphroditus,andnotonhimonly,butonmealso’(inrestoringhimtohealth) (Phil. 2. 27).Whywas this?Would itnothavebeenamercy toPaul if he had died too? Are not God’s ways, ways of mercy? Andtherefore,ifhehaddied,woulditnothavebeenamercytoo?Whatshallwesaytothis?Shallwesayitwouldhavebeenamercyintheissueandevent,asGodwouldsanctifyittotheapostle,anddohimgoodbyit,ashehimself says, ‘All thingswork together for good to them that loveGod’(Rom.8.28)?Indeedthisisgood,butthisisnotall;sinitselfmaybeamercy in the issue.But thePsalmistsays: ‘All thepathsof theLordaremercyandtruth.’NotastepGodtakestowardsHispeople,notanactionthatGoddoes,notonedispensationofprovidence,butitisoutofmercy.Therefore,whatisthemeaningofthesayingthatGodhadmercyonPaulin restoring Epaphroditus?Why should he say so, seeing it would alsohavebeenamercyifhehadbeentakenaway?WouldnotGodstillhaveshowedmercy to Paul even if Epaphroditus had died?Why then doesPaulsaythatGodhadmercyonhimintherestoringofEpaphroditus?

IagreethatindeeditwouldstillhavebeenmercytoPaulifEpaphroditushaddied, but a correctingmercy, amercy in chastisement. The apostleseemsbythisexpressionofhistoimplyamedium,oratleastadifferencebetweenmercy restoring andmercy depriving. Itwould still have beenmercy,butacorrectingmercy,ifGodhadtakenEpaphroditusaway.Andsoit is ingeneral;thoughafflictionsandchastisementsaresent in love,yet because in themselves they are evil, therefore, I say, they proceedoften (not always) from love displeased, from love offended. We say

indeed thatGod is angry; not thatwe are to conceive there is anger inGod,forHeiswithout’passions’evenasHeiswithout‘parts’;butWesayHeisangrybecauseHedealswithusasmenareaccustomedtodealwiththeir fellows in such cases; theywithdraw from them, they chide them,they rebuke them, they correct them. Likewise doesGod, in a paternaldispleasure,acttowardsthoseHedearlyloves.Imustdrawtoacloseinthismatter,butImustfirstmentionafewfurtherparticularssoastogivefullsatisfactiontotheexercised.

(1)First,GoddoesnotforeverchastiseHispeopleforsin.Isaythis,thatnotallthechastisementswhichGodinflictsuponHispeopleareforsin.Some are inflicted for the prevention of sin, as in the case of Paul’stemptation; some for the trial of graces, as in the case of Job. Divinesdistinguishvariouskinds of afflictions. Some are chastisements for sin,someaccompanywitnessingtothetruth;somearetrialsoffaithandgiveexercisetoourgraces.Sothat,thoughitbegrantedthatGodchastisesforsin,yetnotalltheafflictionswhichGodbringsuponustoexerciseusareforsin.Itmaybetrulysaidthatsinisthegeneralcauseofallcalamities,but it cannot always be said that this or that particular affliction isprocuredbyaparticular sin.Wesee this in the caseof the trialswhichcameuponJobandPaul.

(2)GodsometimestakesoccasionbythesinsofHispeopletoafflictandchastisethem.ThusfarmostChristiansareinfullagreement.Manywillgrantsintobetheoccasion,whowillnotgrantthatsinisthecausewhyGodafflictsHispeople;andindeed,thisorthatparticularsinoftenseemstobeanoccasionratherthanacauseofthechastisement.Sinmaybethecause, and yet this or that particular sinmay be but the occasion, as Ihaveshowedbefore.

(3)NotonlydoesGod takeoccasionby sin,butoftenHe chastises andafflictsHispeopleforsin.Forsin,Isay,andnotonlyforthepreventingand the curing of sin, but for thepunishment and correction of it, as Ihave already showed at some length. God makes us to see sin in theeffectswhenwewill not see it in the cause; to see sin in the fruit of itwhenwe refuse to see it in the root.God reveals sin tous throughHisworks,whenwerefusetoseeitthroughHisWord.Thatwhichwewillnotlearn by faith, He will teach us by sense: ‘A rod is for the fool’s back’

(Prov.10.13).

(4)WhenGodchastensHispeopleforsin.Hischastisementsarenotthefruitsofwrathorpartsof thecurse, forthere isnowrath in them; theyarenotsatisfactions forsin; theyarenot sent invindictive justice; theyarenotmerelypenal,butmedicinal;theirreasonisdispleasedlove,andtheirpurposeisfullerembraces.

Thismustsufficefortheanswertothesecondquery.

5.PerformanceofDuty

Query3:Ifabelieverisunderthemorallawasaruleofduty,ishislibertyinChristinfringed?

Thequestionmightwellhavebeendividedintotwoparts:(1)WhetheritconsistswithChristianfreedomtobetiedtotheperformanceofduty?(2)WhethertheChristianistiedtotheperformanceofdutybecauseGodhasso commanded? We shall find these opinions held: (1) That it is aninfringement of the freedom we have by Christ to be tied to theperformanceofdutyatall; (2)That it is farbelow the free spirit of thesaintstobetiedtotheperformanceofdutybecauseGodhascommandedit.Wemightthereforehavedealtwiththesequestionsseparately,butforbrevity’ssakeweshallregardthemasbelongingtoonequestion,yetweshallanswerbothpartsdistinctly.

Wecommencewiththefirstpart:WhetheritconsistswithourChristianfreedom to be tied to the performance of duty? We answer: It is noinfringementtoourlibertyinChristtobetiedtotheperformanceofduty.ItwasthegreatendofourfreedomandredemptionthatwemightserveGod.Christredeemedusfromsinthatwemightengageinsuchservice,assaysZachariasinhissong:Thatwebeingdeliveredoutofthehandofourenemiesmightservehimwithoutfear,inholinessandrighteousnessbefore him, all the days of our life’ (Luke 1. 74-75). Christ has notredeemedusfromthematterofservice,butfromthemannerofservice.Hehasredeemedusfromaslavishspiritinserviceandbroughtusintoason-like spirit; from a spirit of bondage to a spirit of liberty. He hasbrokenthebondsofsubjectiontoother lords, thatwemight takeonustheyokeofservicetoHimwhoseyokeiseasyandwhoseburdenislight(Matt. 11. 30). Hence the apostle, after he has set down the mainprivileges which we enjoy by the redemption of Christ, such asjustification, and freedom from the guilt and power of sin, infers:Thereforewearedebtors,nottotheflesh,toliveaftertheflesh,forifyeliveafterthefleshyeshalldie;butifyethroughtheSpiritdomortifythedeedsofthebody,yeshalllive’(Rom.8.12-13).Thetruthisasplainasifwrittenwithasunbeam. It isaseasy toseparate thesunbeamfromthe

sunasholinessandobediencefromthepersonwhomGodhasjustified.As says the apostle: The grace of God that bringeth salvation hathappeared toallmen, teachingus that,denyingungodlinessandworldlylusts,weshouldlivesoberly,righteously,andgodly,inthispresentworld’(Tit.2.11-12).Sothataboutthefirstpartofourinquirytherecanbenocontroversy.Itdoesconsistwithourfreedomtobetiedtoobedienceortheperformanceofduty;nay,itispartofourredemption,andpartofourfreedom.Indeed, that is trueandrealbondagewhichisnot joinedwithsincereandtrueobedience.

ThreeMistakeswithRegardtothePerformanceofDuty

But there is some controversy about the second part of the query:WhetheritisanyinfringementofourChristianlibertytobetiedtodutybecauseGodcommandsit?Many,thoughtheywouldperformduty,aredisinclinedtobetiedtoit.TheywouldratherperformitastheyfollowtheinclinationsoftheirownspiritsthanasthedutyisimposeduponthembyGod.Therearethreemistakesaboutthismatter.Weshallconsiderfirstthe case of thosewho think they ought only to obeywhen theSpirit ofGodmovesthemtoit.

(i)ThecaseofsuchaswaitfortheSpirittomovethemtoobedience

Indeed,whentheSpiritofGodmoves,itisgoodtogo,tospreadthesailswhenthewindblows,toopenwhenHeknocks.AsitwassaidtoDavid:whenheheardthenoiseinthetopsofthemulberry-trees,thenhewastogoout,forGodwasgoneoutbeforehim(2Sam.5.24).Sowhenyoufind,strongmovings upon your spirits, it is good to take those hints of theSpiritofGod,andtoclosewiththeseason.Manyarelikeharlotswhowillmurder the child in the womb, to avoid the trouble of child-bearing.SimilarlytheywillmurderthebirthsoftheSpirit,becausetheywouldnotbeatthetroubleoftheworkrequiredbyHim.Thisisafearfulsin,tocastwateruponandquenchandcoolanymotionsoftheSpiritofGod.WhenGodmoves,Hecomeswithpowerfortheperformanceoftheduty;thenweshouldgofullsail.Itisgoodtotakesuchhints.Butgoodheartsinthiscasesometimesmistake,andbecomeperplexed,andthinkthatiftheydonotactuponeverymotionoftheirspirits,nomatterhowunseasonableit

is, they have quenched and rejected a motion of the Holy Spirit. IconceiveitthereforenotamisstotellsuchthatsometimesSatansetsustotheperformanceofdutywhenwethinkitistheSpiritofGodthatdoesso.Thismayseemstrange,butyetitistruth.TherearefouroccasionsinwhichSatanusuallysetsmentoduty:

1. When our spirits are much sunk and down, either oppressed withtemptationsortroubles,thenSatanputsustotheperformanceofduty.ItispossiblethatGodalsomaysetustodutyatsuchtimes,butsometimesthepromptingcomesfromSatan.HedealswithusastheBabyloniansdidwith the Israelites when they were oppressed with their captivity inBabylon, and when they said to them,, Come now, sing us one of thesongs of Sion.’ Thus, when the spirit is oppressed and overwhelmed,whenSatanthinksthatweareatagreatdisadvantageandwhenhehopesthatweshall tortureanddistressourselvesthemore, then itmaybeheurgesus topray,andnot tobelieve,as thosedidwhodealtwithChrist,blindinghiseyesandthensaying:‘Prophesy,whosmotethee?’(Luke22.64).Andsoitiswithus:whenSatanhasblindedoureyes,hebidsusnowsee,nowprophesy,nowpray.Whenhehasdisturbedourspirits,whenhehastroubledthesea(ofoursouls)thatitcastsupnothingbutmireanddirt(thatis,distrustfulandunbelievingthoughts),thenhebidsusgoandpray.Yetevenso,thissometimeshelpstolaythestorm,andtoquietthespirittoo,sothatSatanlosesbyit.Itprovestohisowndisadvantage,forunexpected grace comes in which he was not aware of, and which hecouldnotforesee.

2.AsecondoccasionwhenSatanmaysetustotheperformanceofdutyiswhen we are called by God to other employments, either natural orspiritual.Asforthelatter,wemaybecalledtoheartheWord,ortoconferwithothers,ortoengageinothersuchduties,andatsuchtimeshebidsusgotoprayer;thatis,helovestomakedutiesclashonewithanother.Orthedifficultymayarisefromhisuseofournaturalemployments.Itmaybetheoccasionofoureatinganddrinking,oroursleeping.Sometimeshehascarriedapoor souloutofhisbedor takenhim fromhismeat,andtoldhimhemustnowgotoprayer.YetthismaynothavebeentoSatan’sadvantageeither.But thushesometimes temptspoorsouls;and if theydo not go to duty upon his instigation, then he tells them they have

resistedamotionoftheSpiritofGod.If theyobeyhim, it isequally fortheirtrouble;itleadstotroubleeitherway.PerhapshewillchargethemwithPopery and superstition and voluntarypenance, if they rise in thenighttogotoprayerorsimilarexercises.Whorequiresthisatyourhand?hequestions.Itisgoodinallsuchcasestosaywithagodlymanwhowasthusmovedtoprayerwhenheshouldhavebeenasleep,Gettheehence,Satan, I will go to dutywhenGod calls, notwhen thou dost suggest; Ihavecommittedmysoul into thearmsofChrist,and inHisarmsIwillrestandsleep.

3.ButthereisathirdoccasionwhenSatanmaysetustotheperformanceofduty.Whenweareweakinbodyandnotabletoperformit,whenwelackthenaturalspiritstodothework,thenwillheputusonthedoingofit.Heknowsthatifweattemptit,thenhewill,byreasonofournaturalweakness, get the advantage over us. When he puts us to lift logs, heknows we are weak.When he moves us to duty, it is only because heknowsthatwehavenostrength.

4.Anotheroccasionwhenheputsusuponduty iswhenhe thinksdutywillproveasnaretous.Inthiscaseheputsusto it,notastheworkofGod, but as thatwhichwill bring us into difficulty, thatwhichwill notbring us comfort but rather torment and vexation, that which will notraiseuswhenwearedejectedbutcastusdownstill lower.Yet,evenso,heisoftenmistaken.

ThusSatansometimessetsthebelievertotheperformanceofduty.Butso,too,doestheSpiritofGod.Hestirsupthehearttoduty,andwhenHemovesindeed.Hemoveseffectually;Hesetsthebelievertothedutyandgiveshimstrengthtoperformit;Hecarrieshimthrough.AnditisgoodtoobserveGod’stimes,thehintsoftheSpirit,andtogowiththem.Thisismyfirstanswertothemistakeofmyopponents.

Butagain,thoughwearetogotodutywhenGod’sSpiritmovesus,yetwearenottoneglectdutywhenwedonotperceivesuchsensiblemotionsofthe Spirit. Grace moves us, or should move us, to converse with Godeveryday;andifso,itistheSpiritwhomovesustoit.ItistheSpiritwhoregenerated us, though the Spiritwho regenerates us does notHimselfappear; and God’s Spirit may move secretly, even where He does not

movevisiblyandsensiblytothesoul.

Besides, if aperson looks for thisdirect summons toduty, thenhewillnot performduty out of obedience to the command.Wemust performdutyattimesoutofobedience,thoughwearewithoutbothaheartforitandaheart in it.Thatduty isesteemedbyGodwhich iswrestedoutofthehandsoftheflesh,andwhichiscarriedthroughagainsttemptationsandgainsayings.

Furthermore, if the believer never goes to duty but when the Spiritsensiblymoves him to it, he will often lack that communion with Godwhichhenowenjoys.Howoftendoesabelievergotoprayerwithadeadheart,andrisewithalivelyheart!Hebeginswithastraitenedheartandrises with an enlarged heart; he begins dejected and ends comforted!How often, when he could find no suchmotion of God leading him toduty,hasheyetmetwithGodinthemidstoftheduty,andenjoyedGod,inaprayer,inaglorioussweetway!Thoumeetesthimthatrejoicethandworketh righteousness, those that remember thee in thyways’ (Isa. 64.5). God loves to meet those that are in His way. Though the miller isunabletocommandthewind,yethewillspreadhissails,andthusbeinthewaytouseit,ifitcome.Thoughthelamemancouldnotgetintothewaters, nor command themoving of them, yet he would lie for thirty-eight years by thewaters’ side, andundoubtedlywith a deal of longingevery time the waters moved - O that some would throw me in! So,thoughwecannotbringtheSpirittous,yetletussetourselvesinthewayfor Him tomeet with us.Maintain the performance of duty; by it thebelievermay come to see the face of God, to have converse withHim.Thusalsohemakesheadwayagainstsin,getssuppliesofstrengthfromChrist, and gets above the world. Those who speak against theperformanceofdutymightaswellspeakagainsttheactingsof faithandtheexerciseofgrace.ForprayerisnothingelsebutthecommunicationofthesoulwithGod,theactingsoffaithandtheexerciseofgrace.Thismustsuffice for a reply to the first mistake of some, that they are not toperformdutybutwhentheSpiritofGodmovesthemtoit.

(ii)Thecaseofsuchasthinktheyaretodonothingelsebutpray

But there is anothermistake. Some there arewho think they are to donothing else but pray. God has commanded us to pray and they thinkthey are to donothing else. Therefore, ever and anon they run to theirknees,dropasitwereahead,sayoveraPaterNoster(OurFather),andwithaPopishspirittoo,asiftheyhadthusdonesomuchtoobtainlife,somuchlaidoutforthepurchaseofapardonandforheaven.Therearetoomanysuchpersons.

Therearetwochiefkindsofsuchpersons.Therearesuchasareblindandignorant.Theywouldfaingotoheaven,andtheyhearthattheyoughttopray.Thereforetheygotoprayereverymoment,determinednotto loseheavenforwantofprayers.Thereareotherswhoareinhumiliationandwoundedinspirit.Poorsouls!Theygoeverandanonto theirknees. Insomecasesdoubtless there is thedawningof faithandadesire to seekChrist;but inothercases thosewho thuskneeldo soasa salve tohealtheirwounds,orasabribeforapardon,orassomuchgoodmoneylaidoutforthepurchaseofglory.Naturally,menruntoacovenantofworks,but itmust be another kind of work to bring us to Christ. A convictedmanrunstoacovenantofworks.Itisaconvertedmanwhoembracesthecovenantofgrace.Thusmuchforthesecondmistake.

(iii)Thecaseofsuchasthinktheyaretoperformdutybecausetheirheartsinclinethemtoit

There isa thirdmistake.Sometherearewhothink that theyarenot toperform duty because God commands it, but because their own heartsinclinethemtoit.TothisIanswer:ThoughwemustperformdutiessuchasprayingandhearingbecauseGodhascommandedussotodo,yetitisnotalonesufficienttoperformthembecauseGodhascommandedthem.Inexplanationofthis,itmustbeunderstoodthattherearetwokindsoflaws,lawspositiveandlawsnatural.ImeanthatsomelawsarefoundeduponGod’swill and that others are foundeduponGod’s nature. ThosethatarefoundeduponGod’swillaregoodbecauseGodcommandsthem.SuchweremanyoftheOldTestamentlaws,suchastheceremoniesandtheforbiddingofcertainmeats.Thesewerethingsneithergoodnorevilinthemselves,butonlyasGodcommandedorforbadethem.Somelaws,ontheotherhand,werefoundedonGod’snatureandwere intrinsicallyand inherently good in themselves, and not only good because God

commandedthem.

Asforthefirstofthese,namely,thoselawswhichwerefoundedonGod’smere will, it was sufficient thatmen obeyed them simply because Godhad commanded them. The apostle called them a heavy yoke whichneither they nor their fathers were able to bear (Acts 15. 10). In sospeaking,PeterindicatedthatobediencetothemwasmorebecauseGodhadcommanded them, thanbecauseofany inherent intrinsicgoodnesswhichwasinthem.HiscallingofthemaheavyyokewasasignthattheJewsobeyedthem,notoutof lovetothethingscommanded,butoutoflovetothatGodwhocommandedthem.Theywereindeedaheavyyoke,butyettheyboreituntilGodtookitoff.Theywerehardlaws,butyettheysubmittedtothemtillGodwaspleasedtorepealanddisannulthem.AndindeedImaywellcallitsubmission,fortheirobediencewasmoreoutofsubmission than delight. And for those laws it was sufficient that theyobeyedthemmerelybecauseGodhadcommandedthem.

Butas for theother laws, those foundeduponGod’snature, andwhichwereintheirownnaturegoodandholy,itwasnotsufficienttoobeythesesolely becauseGod had commanded them. Itwas also required that inmen’shearts thereshouldbean inwardprincipleagreeable to them,aninwardlovingofthemandclosingwiththem.Thesecommandsmustnotbeesteemedaheavyyokeoraburden,butadelight;andtheyaretobeobeyedfromaspiritoflove.

When,Isay,wearecommandedtoloveGod,tofearGod,tohonourGod,itisnotenoughtodothisbecauseGodcommandsit,buttheremustbeaninwardprinciplebredinuswherebywedoallthis.HethatlovesGodsolely because God commands it does not love God at all. If thiscommandbeall,thenifGodhasnotcommanded,hewouldnotdoit.ButaChristianistodothisthoughthereisneveracommandtobindhimtodoit.HeseessomuchbeautyandlovelinessinGod,hisheartissomuchtakenwithHim,thatHemustneedsloveHim.

And as for prayer, it is not enough that a Christian man prays solelybecauseGodhascommandedprayer,butheistogotothedutyofprayeroutofdesireforcommunionwithGod.Hegoestotheperformanceoftheduty,butnotonlyas it isadutycommanded.Carnalheartswhichhave

nolovetothedutyperformitbecauseofthebarecommand.Butthetruebelievergoestoprayerbecauseitisameansofconverseandcommunionwith God, and he thinks it happiness when he can enjoy a little suchcommunionwithHimintheduty.HeseekstoconversewithGod,notasaservantwithhismaster,butasachildwithhisfather;notasamatterofduty,butashisnaturecallshimtoit;notasaserviceonly,butalsoasaprivilege.HeesteemsaccesstoGodandcommunionwithHimoneofthehighestprivilegesofaChristian.

FourWaysinWhichtheBelieverIsFreefromDuty

IagreethatChristiansarefreedfromdutybytheirfreedominChrist,butonlyintheseways:

(1)Wearefreefromdutyasourtask.Asataskitwasaburdentous.Wearenotlikeday-labourersinthewaysofGod,asifwehadtoearneverypennywehaveatGod’shands.Asfarasdutyisatask,wearefreefromit.

(2)Weare free fromdutymerelyasour trade.Wewalk induty’sways,butnotafter this fashion, for thosewhowalk induty as a tradedonotfollowitforloveofthework,butforloveofthegainswhichcomeofit.AChristianwillperformdutybecausehe loves it, even thoughheseesnogains coming tohimby it.Thework itself is rewardandwages tohim.Consideramanwholovessin,whosenatureisheldincaptivitytosin.Hewilldrinkandsin though it is tohisutterundoing.Just sowill agodlyman serve hisGod.Hewill carry on in theway of obedience even if ityieldshimnorewards.ThereissuchasuitablenessbetweenagodlymanandChristiandutythathewillperformitthoughhegetsnothingbyit

(3)Thebelieverisfreefromslaveryofspiritintheperformanceofduty,and does duty out of a childlikeness of spirit, but others perform dutybecauseofthefearofblowsorofthecudgel.WereitnotforthefearthatGodwouldpunish them for their omission, theywould not go throughwiththeduties.Butthegodlymanwoulddothedutyeveniftherewereno punishment for the omission of it. He counts it his greatestpunishment to be denied communion with God. He would speak withGod;thisisallheasks.

ThecaseofAbsalomwillservetoasmalldegreetoillustratethismatter.Absalom had been banished from the court and from Jerusalem.Afterwards, through themediationofJoab,hewasallowed to return toJerusalem, but he was denied admission to the court and communionwith his father. Whereupon he sends Joab to mediate for him. Thepardoning of his fault was not esteemed so great a mercy as thebanishmentfromhisfather’ssightwasesteemedamisery.Thereforehesaid,‘Letmeseehisface,thoughhekillme.’Hethoughtnopunishmentforhisfaulttobesogreatanevilastobedeniedaccesstohisfatherandcommunionwith him (see 2 Sam. 14). So it is here with the soul. Thegodlyman thinks this the greatest punishment, to be denied access toGodandcommunionwithHim.Oh, thisheesteems tobe theheightofmisery.RatherwouldhebekilledincommunionandaccesstoGodthanenjoyallotherkindsoffreedomwiththedenialofsuchaccess.Amanofcorrupt heart does duty because of punishment through failure toperform it. A child of God esteems it the height of punishment to bedenied communion with God. He has reached the height of happinesswhensuchcommunionishis.‘Blessedisthemanwhomthoucausesttoapproachunto thee’, says thePsalmist (65. 4), andhereinhe conceiveshisblessednesstoconsist,thatis,inapproachestohisGod.

(4) The believer is free from duty upon the tenders and termscommandedinthelaw.Hedoesnotperformdutythatitmaygowellwithhimhere;nordoesheperformdutythathemaygaingloryhereafter.HeregardscommunionandnearnesstoGodashappinessenough.Hisspiritdoesnotsaytohim:Actthus,pray,obey,anditshallgowellwiththeeinthisworld,andgainheavenfortheehereafter.No!heesteemsitapieceof his heaven, to have communion with God. This is ‘coelum extracoelum’(heaventhissideofheaven).Thereisenoughinthethingitself-communionwithGod-toinducehimtoseekitandmakehissouldesireit.Heengagesinthedutyasif,initself,itwereapartofhisreward;andifhecanbutfindGodinit,andhaveconverseandcommunionwithGodinit,oh,thereisheavenenoughandgloryenoughinhissoul.Asforotherprayersofhis,inwhichhissoulfindsnospecialcommunionwithGod,hehas thismuchcomfort from them, thathis souldid in suchand suchaduty set itself in sincerity to converse with and have communion withGod,though,miserableandpoormanthatheis,hefailedtoobtainit.

Nine Differences Between Legal Obedience and EvangelicalObedience

Giveme leave toshowthedifferencesbetweenthe twospirits, the legalspirit and the evangelical, in nine particulars; these will be worthy ofnotice:

(1) The principle thatmoves the one spirit to duty is slavish, the otherchildlike.Inonecasethemandoesthingsinalegalspirit,eitherhopingto get rewards by it, or fearing punishments if he omits the duty. Thegodlyman,ontheotherhand,goesaboutdutyforthesakeofobtainingcommunionwithGod, and knows it to be his reward andhappiness tohavethatcommunion,whilethelackofitisthegreatestpunishmenthecanendure.

(2) The oneman does these things as his delight, and the other as hisburden.AndindeeditmustneedsbeburdentothemwhofindnotGodinprayer, either something of God going out from them to Him, orsomethingofGodcomingdownfromHimtothem.Tothemanwhohastodowithnothingbutdutywhilehe isperformingduty, tohimduty istedious; but to those who have to do with God, with Christ, in theirduties,tothemdutyisadelight.Thoughthemanofslavishspiritprays,hehasnothingtodowithGodinprayer,hehasnoconversewithHim;hehastodowithnothingbutdutyinduty;yea,andnotwithdutyalone,forhehastodowiththeworld,withsininduty,notwithdutyinduty,muchlesswithGodinduty.Thereforeitistediousworktohim.Butthegodlymanhas todowithGod.He labours,hebreathes,hisheart gapes afterHim.He it is whom he has in his eyes, and whom he labours after inprayer,evenifhecannotenjoyHim.

(3) The one type of man performs duty from the convictions ofconscience, the other from the necessity of his nature. With many,obedience is their precept, not their principle; holiness their law, nottheirnature.Manymenhave convictionswhoarenot converted;manyareconvincedtheyoughttodothisandthat,forexample,thattheyoughttopray,buttheyhavenotgottheheartwhichdesiresandlaysholdofthethingstheyhaveconvictionsof,andknowtheyoughttodo.Conviction,

withoutconversion,isatyrantratherthanaking;itconstrains,butdoesnot persuade; it forces, but does not move and incline the soul toobedience.Itterrifiesbutdoesnotreform;itputsamaninfearofsinandmakeshimfeartheomissionofduty,butitdoesnotenablehimeithertohatesinortoloveduty.Allthatitdoesisoutofconvictionofconscience,notfromthenecessaryactofanewnature.Consciencetellsamanthatheoughttodocertainthings,butgiveshimnostrengthtodothem.Itcanshowhimtherightwayandtellhimwhatheoughttodo,butitdoesnotenable the soul to do it. Like amilestone by the roadside, it shows thetravellertheway,butdoesnotgivehimstrengthtowalkintheway.Ontheotherhand,wherethereistheprincipleoftheGospel,wherethereisgrace,itisinthesoulasapilotinashipwhonotonlypointsthewaybutsteersthevesselinthewaywhichheappoints.

(4) The one kind of man looks for his satisfaction in the duty by theperformanceoftheduty,theotherlooksforsatisfactioninthedutyashefindsChristthereby;itisnotintheduty,butabovetheduty,thathefindshissatisfaction.

(5)Theonekindofmancontentshimselfwiththeshell,theotherisnotcontentwithoutthesubstance.ThegodlymangoestodutyasthemeansofcommunionwithGod,toseeGod,toenjoyGod,andtotalkwithGod;theothergoestodutymerelytosatisfythegrumblingsandquarrelsofhisconscience.

(6)Theonetypeofmanperformsdutyinordertolivebyit.Asksuchaman(forheprays)howhe thinkshewillget toheaven,andhewill saythathewillreachitbyprayer.Butthebelieverpraysandperformsduty,yethe looksbeyond them,and looks to livebyChristalone.He lives intheduty,butnotbytheduty;helivesinobedience,butyetlookshigherthantheobedience:Ilive,yetnotI,butChristlivethinme.’Helooksforasmuch by Christ, and from Christ, as though he had never prayed aprayer or shed a tear. Even though he has done both these things inabundance,yet forhisacceptancehe looksup toChristas ifhehimselfhaddonenothingatall.

(7) The one type of man does things coldly and formally, the otherfervently.YetIdonotquestionbutthatattimestheremaybecoldnessin

agodlymanandearnestnessintheother.IfBaal’spriestsprayedtotheiridol so earnestly, much more may a natural conscience God-wards. Anaturalmanmayprayearnestly.ThereisnodoubtthatAhabwasatonetimeearnest.Acondemnedmanmaycryearnestlyforpardon.Anaturalmanmayprayearnestlyattimeswheninfearorhorror,orunderpangsof conscience, but he does not cry believingly. There may be muchaffection in a prayer when there is but little faith; theremay be fleshyaffections, natural affections, affections heightened either fromconvictionsor fearsorhorrors.Yet thesearebut the criesofnature, ofsense,andofreason, thecriesof flesh,notof faith.Affectionsbasedontruefaitharenotloud,yettheyarestrong;theymaybestill,yettheyaredeep; though they are not so violent, yet they are more sweet, morelasting.

(8)The formalmandoesdutywithaview to it servingotherends,andespeciallywhenhe findshimself inextremedifficulties.Incertaincasesthings which in themselves are looked upon as most evil may beperformed.Amerchantmaycastallhisgoodsoutoftheshipinwhichhesails;not thathe looksontheactas inanywaydesirable-hemaycastawayhisheartwithhisgoods-butyetinacertaincasehemaysubmittoit,tosavehislife.Somemenengageindutyinasimilarway;theydesireholinessbutonlyundergreatexternalpressure.They lookuponprayer,uponobedience,uponthemortificationoftheirlusts,andsuchlike,assomany hard tasks and impositions which they must submit to if theywouldcometoglory.Butitisnotsowiththegodlyman.Hecloseswiththesedutiesashisheaven,asapartofhishappiness,apieceofhisglory.Hedoesnotclosewith them fromanecessityof submission,butoutofdelight;thesethingsarenothispenancebuthisgloryandhisdesire.Theothermanpartswithsin,notbecausesin isnotdesirable, forheweepsafterit,butbecauseitisdamning.HepartswithsinasJacobpartedwithBenjamin,becauseotherwisehewouldstarve;orasPhaltielwithMichal,because otherwise he will lose his head; or as the merchant with hisgoods, because otherwise he will lose his life. And so he closes withholiness,notoutofloveanddesireforit,butbecausehemustendureitifhewouldcometoheavenatlast.Butthegodlyman,ontheotherhand,partswithsinaspoison,asanaccursedthingwhichhedesirestoberidof,andembracesholinessashishappiness.Hethirststoenjoy itandto

beswallowedupbyit.

(9)Theonekindofmandoesdutyasasickmaneatshisfood,notoutofdesireforitanddelightinit,butbecauseheknowsthathewilldieifhedoesnoteat;yethehasnodesireor stomach for it.But thegodlymandoes duty after the manner in which a healthy man feeds, not merelybecauseheneeds food,butbecausehedesires itanddelights in it.Theonemanengagesindutyasifitweremedicine,notfood.Heisreluctanttoperformit;hehasnopleasureinit;heisdriventoitonlybecauseheconceivesthathissoul’shealthdemandsit.Butthegodlymanengagesindutyasahealthfulmansitsdown tomeat; there isdelight, desire, andpleasureintheexercise.Thegodlyareasthenew-bornbabesthatdesirethesinceremilk(1Pet.2.1).

Theonemancries:ThegoodthatIwoulddo,Icannotdo;theevilthatIwouldnotdo,Ido.’Theothermancries:ThegoodthatIhavenodesiretodo,Ido;andtheevilthatIdesiretodo,Idarenotdo.’Thelatterwouldsin,butdaresnotbecauseofwrath;hedoesdutybuthasnoheartforit,becausehelackstherightspirit.

DelightInDuty

Alldelightindutiesarisesfromasuitabilityofspiritinthedoingofthem.If there is no gracewithin the heart to answer to the call of duty fromwithout,ifthereisnoprincipleintheheartagreeabletothepreceptoftheWord,theheartwillneverdelightinthem.This,then,isthereasonwhyagodly man conducts himself well in duty, not merely because it iscommanded, but because he has the nature which truly and rightlyresponds to the command. The law of God which is in the Book istranscribedintohisheart;itishisnature,hisnewnature.Sothatheactshisownnaturerenewedasheactsobedience.Theeyeneedsnocommandtosee,northeeartohear;itistheirnaturetoseeandhear.Thefacultyofseeing is the command to see. So far as the heart is renewed, it is asnaturalforittoobeyasfortheeyetoseeortheeartohear;asnaturaltoliveinobedienceasforthefishtoliveinwaterorthebirdinair.

Thusitisthatwedonotobeymerelybecauseobedienceiscommanded-

themerecommandisforsuchashavenovitalprincipleinthem-butweobey from a principle which God has implanted in us suitable to thecommands ofGod.We grant that the command is the rule, apart fromour obedience, but grace is the principle within. The heart and thecommandanswertooneanother.Asfaceanswersfaceinthewater,orina glass, so it is with the heart and the command; the command istranscribedintheheart.Thisisthereasonwhythereissomuchdelightinthegodlyman’sobedience,foritisnaturaltoobey,sofarastheheartisrenewed.Asitisnaturalfortheeyetoseeandtheeartohear,soitisnatural for the renewed heart to yield obedience to the command; andwiththisobediencecomesdelight.Tdelighttodothywill,OmyGod’(Ps.40.8).Whereinwashisdelight?Thepsalmist shows in thewords thatfollow: Thy law is within my heart.’ Here we see the ground of trueobedience;thelawwasnotonlyhiscommand,buthisverynature.IfthelawismerelyourcommandwecannotdelighttodothewillofGod.Wecanperformdutiesbutwecannotdelightinthem,thoughwemaythinkthemneedfulassomethingnecessaryforgloryandforheaven;butwhenonce the lawofGodbecomesour verynature, thenwe come todelightourselvesinobedienceandinthewaysofGod.

Actionsofnatureareactionsofdelight.Theeyeisneverwearyofseeingnortheearofhearing;neitheristheheartwearyofobeying;thatis,asfarastheheartisrenewedorsanctified.SofarasthelawofGodisitsnature,sofardoesitfinddelightinobedience.GodhaspromisedinHiscovenantof grace to writeHis laws on the tables of the heart. Thosewho knownothingofthishavethelawintablesofstone,andwriteafteritasafteracopy;itisathingoutsideofthem,andtheworkishard.Butforthegodly,God says He will write His laws on the tables of the heart; He willtransplant them into the soul; they become the believer’s nature. Andthenobediencedoesnotseemtobeastrangecommand,a lawimposedfromwithout,butobediencebecomesanaturalthing,arisingfromalawwithin theheart, thegodlyman’sverynature.Fromthis source springsthatabundanceofdelightinthelawwhichweseethroughoutPsalm119.Delight inobedience toGod inHis lawbecomes thenatureof theman,andsofarasthatnewnatureacts,itactswithdelight.

Igrantthattheremaybeakindofirksomenessandtediousnessinusat

times as we seek to do those things which yet are natural and full ofdelight.Though it isnatural for theeye to see,and thoughseeing is itsdelight-Solomonsaysthat‘theeyeisneverwearyofseeing’(Eccles.1.8)-thatistobeunderstoodofasoundeye.Iftheeyeissore,itmaybreedatediousness in the eye even when it does that in which it so muchdelights. Similarly, though it is natural for the soul to obey, andobedience is thatwherein itdelights,as the fishdelights inwater,yet iftheprincipleonwhichitactsfromwithinbecomesdisturbedandinjured,itmaybreedakindof irksomeness,orweariness,or tediousness in thesoulinthedoingofthatthingwhichitsomuchdelightstodo.

Thisirksomenessmayarisefromvariouscauses.Theheartofthebelievermaybedampedwith carnal affections, or itmaybepulled backby theremains of corruption. At times it may drive heavily under somevexatiousandlong-drawn-outtemptation;orstrangetrialsmayinterveneandoccasionsomesinkingof the spirits.And,alas, the causemaybe arelapseintosin.Yet,takethesaintathisworst,andwefindthathehasastrongerbiasGod-wardsthanothershaveevenwhenattheirbest.Intheonecasethereisawillrenewed,thoughforthepresentawillobscuredorinconflict;intheothercasetheremaybesomemovetowardsthegivingofobedience,butthewillislacking.

Thusmuchmustserveforanswertothethirdmainquery.Ihaveplainlyshowed that it is no infringement of Christian liberty to be tied to theperformance of duties, and to perform and accomplish duties, becauseGodhascommandedthem.ThefreenessoftheChristianconsistsinthis,that he obeys the commands of God, not only because God hascommandedthem,butoutofprinciplesofloveanddelight,andbecausehehaswithinhisheartanatureagreeabletothethingscommanded.HepraysbecauseGodcommandsprayer,butnotonlyso.Hepraysbecausethereisasuitablenessbetweenhisheartandtheworkofprayer,betweenhissoulandtheduty.HehasdesiresafterGod,andhissouldelights inhisapproachesto,andhisconversewith,God.ThushaveIdealtwiththequestionatlarge.

6.PartialBondage

Query4:CanChrist’sfreemensinthemselvesintobondageagain?

WearetoconsiderwhetherthefreemeninChrist,orthosemadefreebyChrist,mayormaynotsinthemselvesintobondageagain.Someaffirmtheone,andsometheother.Ishallanswerbriefly.

TwoKindsofBondage

There is a twofold bondage; universal bondage, and partial or gradualbondage.Weshallconsiderfirstthebondagewhichisuniversal, that is,thestateofbondage,whichisbondageproperlysocalled.Itisthreefold:

1.Universalbondage

1.Itisabondagetosin,asisexpressedinTitus3.3: 'Weourselvesalsoweresometimesfoolish,disobedient,deceived,servingdiverse lustsandpleasures’.SoalsoinRom.6.20:‘Forwhenyeweretheservantsofsinyewere free from righteousness’. And again in John 8. 34: ‘He thatcommittethsinistheservantofsin’.Andagainin2Pet.2.19:‘Whiletheypromisethemliberty,theythemselvesaretheservantsofcorruption’.

2.ItisabondagetoSatan,whoisGod’sjailer,andholdsdownpoorsoulsunderbrazenbarsandirongates,nottobebroken.Heisthe‘spiritthatnowworkethinthechildrenofdisobedience’(Eph.2.2).

3·Itisabondagetothelaw,bothtotherigourandthecurseofthelaw.The law requires hard and impossible things, yea, and that in suchseverity that itwill not accept of themost eminent endeavourswithoutperfectperformance.Norwillitacceptobedienceinmuch,ifamanfailsinalittle.Neitherwillitadmitofrepentanceafterfailure;onebreachofthe law cannot be made up again, either by a double diligence or byrepentance.Suchistherigourofthelaw.

Souls under the law are in bondage to the curse of the law. It is anextensiveanduniversalcurse,extendingtosoul,body,estate,silver,gold,and relations, as can be seen in Deuteronomy chapter 29. It is anunavoidablecurse.Amanisunabletoobeyinallthingsandthereforeisunavoidably shut up under the malediction and curse; as the apostlereasons inGal.3.9-11: ‘Asmanyasareof theworksof the law(that is,underthelaw)areunderthecurse’.Andhowdoesheproveit?,Foritiswritten,Cursed is everyone that continuethnot inall thingswhicharewritteninthebookofthelawtodothem.’Hereweseetheimpartialityofthecurse-to,everyone’-andtheseverityofit.Itcomesuponallunderthe lawwhoobeynot the law, that is,whoobeynot inevery thing. Ifamanshouldobey inall things,buthaveoneomissionand failing inhislife,itwouldconcludehimunderthecurse.Andamanunderthelawwhocontinues not to obey in all things is cursed. This, then, is the state ofbondage,orbondageproperlysocalled.

2.Partialbondage

There is also a partial or gradual bondage, a bondage in part or indegrees,which is a bondage improperly so called. This is a bondage inrespectofcomfort,andalsoinrespectofthemannerofobedience.AndsoIshallanswerthisqueryintwoconclusions.

(1) The first conclusion is that the freeman of Christ, or those that aremadefreebyChrist,shallneveragainsinthemselvesintothefirstkindofbondage,thatis,intouniversalbondageorthestateofbondage.Christ’sfreemancanneveragainbecomeSatan’sbond-slave.Heshallnevermorebe a servant to sin, for the promise runs: ‘Sin shall not have dominionoveryou:foryearenotunderthelawbutundergrace’(Rom.6.14).Sinmayexerciseatyranny,butneverasovereignty.Abelievermaybecarriedcaptive,astheapostlesaysinRom.7.23- ‘bringingmeintocaptivity’-buthe isneverawillingcaptive.Hemay fall intosin,buthewillnevermorebeaservanttosin.Hisearswillneverbeboredintokenofawillingandvoluntarysubjectiontosin.

Nor can a believer ever again be a slave to Satan. Satan may get theadvantageofhim,buthecannevermorebecomeSatan’swillingservant.

Neither canhe ever again comeunder the law, its rigour and its curse.Thelawcantakenoholdofhimtocondemnation.Andwhy?Becauseheisnotunderlawbutundergrace.Ifhecansinhimselffromundergrace,thenindeedheisbroughtoncemoreundertherigourofthelaw,anditscurse.But this isan impossibility.Thebeliever is free.Somuch for thefirstconclusion.

(2)The second conclusion is that, though the freemenofChrist cannotsin themselves into a state of bondage again, that is, into a state ofuniversalbondage,yettheymaysinthemselvesintoagradualorpartialbondage.Thiswillappearintwoparticularcases.

(i)Abondageinrespectofcomfort

The freemenofChristmay sin themselves into abondage in respect ofcomfort.ThisappearsinthecaseofDavidasseeninPsalm51: ‘Restoreuntomethejoyofthysalvation’.MenthatwillnotfollowthedirectionoftheSpiritofGodshalllacktheconsolationsoftheSpirit.Iftheydoworksofdarkness, theymust expect towalk indarkness.Thoughpromisesofgrace are absolute, yet promises of peace and comfort seem to beconditional.Notthatourwalkinghasanymeritingordeservingpowerfortheprocuringofourpeace.But this is theway inwhichGodbestows itandcontinuespeaceandcomforttous.Inthewaysofdutywemaintainour communionwithGod, our approaches toHim, our actings of faithandgrace;andintheseways,ascomfortandpeaceareprocured,soaretheycontinued.Graceisasthefire,comfortastheflamethatcomesfromit.

But as it is with green wood so it is with us. As green wood needs acontinualblasttokeepitaflame,elseitquicklygathersashandbecomesdead,soWemusthavethecontinualexerciseofourgraces.Therewillbeno flame, no comfort, without the exercise of faith, and of grace, andwithoutanobedientwalkbeforeGod.Promisesofgrace,asIhavealreadysaid,areabsolute,butpromisesofcomfortareconditional:Tohimthatorderethhisconversationaright,willIshowthesalvationofGod’(Ps.50.23). The work of righteousness shall be peace, and the effect ofrighteousness shall be quietness and assurance for ever’ (Isa. 32. 17).

‘Thoumeetesthimthat rejoicethandworketh righteousness, those thatremember thee in thy ways’ (Isa. 64. 5). ‘If ye love me, keep mycommandments.AndIwillpraytheFather,andheshallgiveyouanotherComforter,thathemayabidewithyouforever’(John

14.15-16). ‘Hethathathmycommandments,andkeepeththem,heitisthatlovethme:andhethatlovethmeshallbelovedofmyFather,andIwilllovehim,andwillmanifestmyselfuntohim’(John14.21).Here,itisseen,all seems toheuponcondition.So it is inGal.6. 16: ‘Asmanyaswalkaccordingtothisrule,peacebeuponthem,andmercy,andupontheIsraelofGod.’Sothatifmenwalknotinthewaysofobedience,theymaylackcomfort,theymaylackpeace.

ThefreemenofChristmaysinthemselvesintoabondagebysin,thoughnot intothebondageofsin.Theymaysinthemselves intoabondageoffear,yea,andabondageoftrouble.Theirsinmaycostthembrokennessof bones, though they shall not sin themselves into a state of bondageagain.Thoughabelievercannotsinawaygrace,yethemaysinawaytheevidence, the sense, the comfort of it. Though he cannot sin away hispardon,yethemaysinawaythesenseofitandthecomfortofit.Thoughhehasit,hehasnocomfortfromit.Itisasthoughtherewasnopardonasfarasheisconcerned;otherwiseweareboundtosayamanmayhavefulnessofpeace,ofassurance,andofcomfort,evenwhenheisinvolvedinthehighestactsofsin.Andsomehaveevensaidthis.

AChristianmanmaynotonlysinawaythesenseandcomfortofpardon,but the evidenceandknowledgeof it, as thatplace in2Peter seems toimply: ‘He hath forgotten that hewas purged from his old sins’ (1. 9).New sins bring new fears, new guilts and troubles. All the formerfoundationsandrestingplacesofthesoulseemtobeshaken;newdoubtsarisewithin themanas towhetherornothe is justifiedandpardoned;andthesenewdoubtsbringnewtroublesandfearsonthesoul.

But some raise objection to this doctrine. They say that this is theChristianman’sweakness, for the freemenofChrist are let loose (fromthe law) to enjoy the free Spirit of Christ. Dr. Crisp speaks thus in hisChristAloneExalted.HesaysthatChristianshavefreediscourseandfreesocietywiththeSpiritofGod,andmayhearallthegraciouslanguageof

God’sthoughts,yea,andwithapplicationandcomfort,andthat(assomeevensay)astheycomehotoutofsin.

Ianswer:Thisisourweaknessindeed,butapenalweakness,aweaknesswhich isa chastisementof formerwickedness.Thereare threekindsofdesertions which may come to a godly man: conditional, for thepreventionofsin,asPaul’sseemstobe;probational,fortrial,andfortheexercise of grace, as Job’s; penal, for chastisement following the givingwaytowickedness,asinthecaseofDavid.

Inthefirsttwoofthesecases,itisourweaknessindeed,butinthethirdcase the weakness is very different. It is brought upon ourselves byindulged sin, a weakness inflicted upon us as chastisement forwickednesscommitted,asitwasinDavid.Hisgreatsinhadbroughtthistroubleandweaknessuponhim.

TheSpiritofGodisatenderanddelicateSpirit.IfwegrieveHim,Hewillgrieveus.IfwewillnotfollowHiscounselandcommands,weshalllosethecomfortsandjoysthatHebringsus. ‘Your iniquitieshaveseparatedbetween you and yourGod’ (Isa. 59. 2). Sin does not lead to a total orfinal separation between God and ourselves; yet it may cause awithdrawment,andbreedadistancebetweenGodandus.Itmaycastupsuchacloud,thatallthefaithwehavewillnotbeabletoseethroughit,as was the case with David. A passage in Isaiah proves this: ‘For theiniquityofhis covetousnesswas Iwroth, and smotehim. I hidme andwaswroth’ (57. 17).Herewe seewhat troubles the soul draws to itselffrom the admittance of sin, even ordinary sin. All the former restingplaces of the soul are no rest to a man. All his former evidences arebecloudedandhidsothathecannotdiscernthem.

Butitmaybesaidthatthisismerelyhisweaknesstoo,asDavidsaysinPs.77.10:Thisismyinfirmity’.Igrantthatitisourweaknesstoquestionformer blessings, as for example, if God has given us a well-foundedevidence of pardon and of our interest in Christ, we are prone to calleverything in question again. But we must remember that there is aweaknessthatcomestoamanonaccountofhisturningasidefromGod,aweaknessthataccompanieswickedness.Godsuffersittobeso,sothatHis fatherly ends may be accomplished in him. Such a man must be

humbledforhissin,andthereforefourthingscomeuponhim:Goddoesnot now look upon him as formerly; conscience does not now speakpeaceablytohimasformerly;itmaybethatSatanisletlooseuponhimtotempthim;itmaybethattheSpiritofGodwithdrawsbecauseHehasbeengrieved.Thennomarvelifthemanisintroubleandifhissoullackscomfort.

But some may object and say: It is the man’s work, after he hascommitted sin, to believe; and if to believe, to be comforted. I answer:Comfortisthefruitoffaith,andinthisrespectitisourworktobelieve.But a man may be able to believe, and yet may not be able to takecomfort.AmanmayrestuponChristforpardon,andyetuponreflectionhemaynotbeabletogiveevidencethatheisthusrestingonHim.Also,amanmaybeabletodiscernhisownacts,andyethiscomfortmayforatimebesuspended.Thoughitisourworktobelieve,itisnotsoproperlyourworktotakecomfort.Godwouldhaveustakecomfortinanorderlyway,proceedingfrombelievingandmourning,tojoyandcomfort.God’sworkings are orderlyworkings. It is now aman’swork, therefore, if hehas sinned afresh, to believe afresh, and mourn afresh, and then toreceivecomfort.

Again,aChristianmaybecomforted,firstofall,inrespectofhisformerjustification.His new sin does not cancel his former pardon, though itwill interrupt and disturb his present peace and comfort from it. Andsecondly,hemaybecomfortedinthis,thatthereismercyenoughinGodto coverall his sins, grace enough in Christ to cure this fresh sin. Andfurther,inthisheistofindcomfort,thatGoddoesnotsufferhimtoliveinsin,butthatHehasrevealedhissin tohim,humbledhimfor it,andbroughthimbacktoChristinwhomhemayrenewhispeaceandregainhissenseofcomfort.

Butsomewillobjectthat,ifourpeacemaybeinterruptedbyourillwalk,thenpeaceandcomfortdonotdependuponChrist,butuponourselves;thatitisnotChrist’sworkbutourwalkthatbringspeacetous.Ianswer:SomedistinguishbetweenapeacewithGodandapeacewithourselves.The peace with God cannot be lost, but peace with ourselves may beforfeited. Others distinguish between a peace of conscience, and peacewithconscience.Justaswickedmenmayhavepeacewithconsciencebut

nopeaceof conscience, so thegodlymayhavepeaceof conscience,butnotpeacewithconscience.

Consciencemayobjectandquarrelanddispute,whenactuallythesoulistrulyatpeace.

Stillothersdistinguishbetweena realpeaceandan enjoyedpeace.Thegodlymayhavearealpeace inrespectof theirstateandcondition,andyetmaynot have a sense of peace that they can layhold of and enjoy.Again, others distinguish between the peace of justification, and peacefrom justification. The former, they say, remains inviolate anduninterrupted, even when the soul neither sees nor feels its usualconsolations (see 2 Cor. 5. 7 and Ps. 49. 5), but the latter may beinterrupted and disturbed by our manner of walk. And yet othersdistinguish between a peace of justification and a peace fromsanctification. The former, they say, depends no more upon our walkthan our justification itself does; but the other depends upon theexactness of our walking. God, they say, does not maintain our peacewhileweneglecttowalkinthewaysofpeace:‘Asmanyaswalkaccordingto this rule, peace be on them’ (Gal. 6. 16). God always carries onHisworkofpeace andholiness inproportion the one to the other, and theonenourishesandhelpstheother.

In a word, I conceive that wemay distinguish between the foundationandbeingofaChristian’speace,andtheflourishingandwell-beingofit.ThefoundationofourChristianpeaceisnotinusbutinChrist,notinourholinessbutinHisrighteousness,notinourwalkingbutinHisbloodandsuffering.Heisthespringofourpeace,andinHimwehavepeace(John16.33).He is said tobeourpeace (Eph.2. 14).But the flourishingandwell-beingof this peacemuch depends upon the exercise of our gracesand our exact walkingwithGod. It is a peace purchased for us by theobedience of another, but it must be cherished by our own obedience.Andindeed,itsofardependsuponus,thatifwedonotwalkexactly,eventhoughwecannotsinawayourformerpardon,yetwemaysinawayourpresentpeace.

Thefive-foldpeaceofaChristianman

Thereisafive-foldpeacethatamanmaysinaway,theleastofwhichisworthaworld:

(1) There is a peace which flows from the witness - bearing of ourconscience toour integrity andexactwalking.Hezekiah enjoyed suchapeacewhen he said: ‘Lord, remember now, I beseech thee, how I havewalkedbeforetheeintruthandwithaperfectheart,andhavedonethatwhichisgoodinthysight’(Isa.38.3).Paulhadthesame(Rom.1.9and1Thess.2.4-6).Thispeacewemaysinaway.Ifwefallintofreshsin,thecomfortsofourformerwalkingwillnotbearusup.

(2)Thereisapeacewhichflowsfromthesoul’scommunionandconversewith God in duty. There is peace as well as sweetness in every part ofholiness, and this peace a man may sin away. All the sweetness andonenessofspiritwiththeLordindutydepartsfromhimifheturnsafreshto sin, with the result that the soul, formerly comforted, is nowinterruptedanddisturbed inall its approaches toGodand its conversewithHim.

(3)Thereisapeacewhichcomestothebelieverfromtheexerciseofthegrace implanted inhim.Hecannotgiveexercise toanygracebut somepeace and comfort comes of it.Whenhe exercises faith inbelievingonandclosingwithChrist,whenherepentsandmournsforsin,somepeace,somecomfort,resultsfromtheseexercises.Butamanmaysinawaythiscomfort.Freshsinwoundsanddisturbshimintheexerciseofhisgraces,and the comforts which flow from such exercises are necessarilyinterrupted.Nay, ifamancansinawaytosomedegreethatmeasureofgrace which he has obtained through his own improvement of grace,muchmoremayhesinawaythepeacewhichshouldflowfromthis.

(4)ThereisapeacewhichflowsfromthesenseandknowledgeofGod’sgraceimplantedinthesoul.Whenamanisabletotraceouttheworkofgraceinhissoul,theremust

needsbepeaceandcomfortinit.Nowthisalsoamanmaysinaway.Hemaysinawaythesenseandknowledgeofaworkofgracewithinhim.Hemaysodarkenandobscurehisownevidencesofgracebyhissinthatheisnolongerabletoreadthem,nortodiscernthatthereisaworkofgrace

withinhim.Hemaynowfindenoughofgrace toafflicthim,butnotsomuchastocomforthim.Hislightdidnotdirecthimtoexactdutybefore,andnowitafflictshim.

(5)ThereisapeacewhichflowsfromtheassurancethatGodisatpeacewiththesoul,apeacewhichflowsfromthesenseofDivinefavour.Thispeacewemay forfeit and lose. Thoughwe cannot sin away our formerpardon,yetwemaysinawayourpresentpeace.Nay,wemaysinawaythesenseandcomfort,andeventheknowledge,ofourformerpardon.Thismay be implied in thewords of the apostle: ‘Hehath forgotten that hewaspurgedfromhisoldsins’(2Pet.1.9).

ThushaveweprovedthataChristianman,afreemanofChrist,maysinhimselfintobondageinrespectofcomfort.

(ii)Abondageinrespectofthemannerofobedience

Butoncemore,aChristianmaysinhimselfintobondageinrespectofthemanner of his obedience. His present state may differ much from hisformerstate.ThoughhestillservesGod,yetitisnotwiththatmeasureofwillingness,notwiththatmeasureoffreedom,cheerfulness,anddelight,not with that enlargedness of heart which marked his former service.David, after his sin, desired that he might have the free Spirit of Godrestoredtohim.HehadnotlosttheSpirit;thefreeSpiritwasinhim;buthe lacked that former freedom of spirit. He lacked the operations andworkings of God’s Spirit. He lacked that comfort in service and thatfreedomforservicewhichhehadenjoyedbefore.Thewheelswerenowtakenoff,andhewentheavilyandsadlyinthewaysoflife.Itisnaturalfortheeyetoseeandfortheeartohear.Actsofnaturesuchastheseareactionsofdelight.Butiftheeyeissoreandtheearatfault,itmaybreedawearinessandburdensomenessinthedoingoftheactionsofnature.Soitishere.Iftheprincipleofactionwithinusiswounded,itmayproduceanirksomeness in thedoingof the things inwhichwe formerlydelighted.Thoughsincannotbringagodlymanintothestateofaslave,yetitmaydisablehimfromservingfullyasason.

Servileness of spiritmay be caused by fear, by doubts and unbelief, bygraceweakenedinitsoperationbytheprevailingsofsin,orbythesoul’s

lackof its formergracious convictions and its discouragement in all itsapproachestoGod.Indeed,themanstillservesGod,butitismoreoutofobedience than out of delight.He dares not but pray, and yet he findslittleheart inprayer.He isnowwounded in all his approaches toGod.Thesweetagreementandco-naturalnesswhichformerlyexistedbetweenhisheart andduty isnowgone.The complacencyanddelightwhichhepreviouslyenjoyedinallhisapproachestoGodandinwalkingwithHimaregone, too.Hissouldrivesheavily in thewaysofobedience.Henowgoestodutyasasickmantohisfood.Heperformsdutyratherfromthecompulsionsofhismindthanfromanynaturaldelighthehasinit.Thusitbefallsmanyofthesaintsintheirrelapsesintosin.Theysinthemselvesintobondageinrespectofthemanneroftheirobedience.

Thismustserveastheanswertothefourthquery,whetherthefreemenofChristmay not sin themselves into bondage.We shall now turn to ourfifthquery.

7.ObediencefortheSakeofReward

Query5:MayChrist’sfreemenperformdutiesforthesakeofreward?

ThreeOpinionsRespectingThisStatedAndExamined

Therearethreeopinionsconcerningthisquestion:

(1)Somesaythatwearetododuty,andtowalkinthewaysofobedience,thatwemaymerit heaven and glory.Wemust fast, pray, and performgoodworks;andall thiswithaneyetoglory,aswagesforwork,andasthe rewarddue to obedience.And thosewhobelieve thisperform theirworks - their fasting, praying, penances and such like - that therewiththeymaypurchaseheavenandglory.

TheCouncilofTrentpronouncesacurseonthosewhosaythatajustifiedpersondoesnotmeriteternallifebyhisobedience.Andwhatwouldnottheproudheartofamando, ifbydoinghemightmeritheaven?Whattormentshavetheveryheathenendured,outofthebeliefthattheywouldcometohappinessbythem?Andwhatwouldnotothersdo?Ihavereadof one who said that he would swim through a sea of brimstone if hemightbutcometoheavenatlast.Menwouldbeatgreatpains,andwouldsparenocost, ifwhattheydidmightbelookeduponasa layingout forheaven,andasthepurchaseofgloryandthewagesforwork.TheproudheartofmanwouldfainhavethatofdebtwhichGodhasdecreedtobeofgrace.Hedesires toobtain thatbypurchasewhichGod intends tobeafreegift.

Butsuchopinionsasthesehavenoplaceinourinquiry.Certainly,thoughwemaydogoodworks,andwalk in thewaysofobedienceandwithaneye to the recompense of the reward, yet none of us holds that thesethingsaretobedonewithreferencetoourmeritingofit.Theapostletellsusthatitisnotofdebtbutofgrace(Rom.4.4);andagain, ‘Bygraceyearesaved’(Eph.2.5,8-10).Andyetagain.ThegiftofGodiseternallife’(Rom.6.23).‘Gloryisnotthewagesofaservant,buttheinheritanceofa

son.’ThusCalvinspeaks,whileAugustinesays,‘GodcrownsHisgifts,notourmerits.’

Indeed,whatareallourworks incomparisonwiththatglory?Ifalloursufferings are not worthy to be compared to the glory that shall berevealed,whatthenareourdoings?ItwasasayingofAnselm,‘IfamanshouldserveGodathousandyears,hecouldneverbythatservicedeservehalfaday,infactnotonemomentoftime,inthateternalglory.‘

Weshallthereforecastman’sdeservingsoutofourinquiry;itistoogrossfor Christian ears. The apostle tells us plainly:, Not by works ofrighteousnesswhichwehavedone,butaccordingtohismercyhesavedus’ (Tit. 3. 5). ‘Notbyworksof righteousness ‘, that is, not by our ownworks,eventhoughweweretosay,assomeofthemoremoderateofouradversariesdo,‘ourownworkssprinkledwiththebloodofChrist’.Allareinjurioustograce.Forbygracearewesaved,andgraceisinnowaygraceifnot everywaygrace.Butherewe leave such adversaries, and turn tootheropinionswhicharetobedebated.

(2) Some say peremptorily that we must have no eye, no respect toheaven and glory, in our obedience.Wemustwalk, they say, in all theways of obedience, with this freedom, carrying no respect to therecompenseof the rewardatall.Theysay it isutterly inconsistentwiththefreespiritofaChristian,anddestructiveofhisChristianfreedom,tododutywithrespecttoreward.

(3)Thereisathirdopinionthatsayswemaydoholyactionsandwalkinthewaysofobedience,andmayalso,indoingso,castaneyeupon,andhaverespectto,therecompenseofthereward.

These two last opinions need examination. We have rejected the firstopinionasquiteinconsistentwiththenatureofgraceandthefreedomoftheGospel;butthesetwootheropinionsareheldbysomeasconsistentwith grace and Christian freedom. Yet these two seem to be mutuallycontradictory.Oneofthemsaysthatwearetodoholyserviceandnottocastaneyeupon therecompenseof thereward.Theother says thatwemayhaverespecttotherecompenseoftherewardintheperformanceofholyduties.

Thefirstopinion,thatwearenottohaverespecttotherecompenseofthereward,issupportedbythefollowingarguments:

1. Because it overthrows the nature of our obedience and makes thatmercenaryandservilewhichshouldbeson-likeandfree.IfweobeyGodinreferencetoheavenandglory,wedonotobeyfreely,wedonotserveGod for what He is in Himself, but servilely and mercenarily, ourobediencebeingservileinprincipleandmercenaryinitsend.

2. Because a respect to the recompense of the reward in obedienceoverthrows the nature of grace, and makes that to be man’s purchasewhich is in reality the freely bestowed gift ofGod. The nature of gracemustneedsbeoverthrownbythis.

3. Because all the blessings we inherit are included in the covenant ofgracemadeonourbehalf.SaysGod:Iwillgiveyougrace,Iwillpardonyour sins, Iwill give you glory.Nowwedonot obey thatwemayhavepardon, nor obey that we may have grace. Why then the other? Whyshouldmansaythatheobeysthathemayhaveglory,seeingthatthisisalsosimilarlypromised?

4·Becauseall theblessingsweseekare fullypurchasedbyJesusChristandprovided for inChrist.Therefore theyarenotourpurchase.Wedonotobeythatwemaygetthisorthat;butbecausegloryispurchasedforus, andwe are persuaded thereof, thereforewe obey the commands ofGod.

As for the other opinion, that we may rightly have respect to therecompenseoftherewardinourobedience,itismanagedanddefendedbythefollowingarguments:

(1)ThatwhichGodhaspropoundedasanincentivetoobedience,wemayrightly have regard to as we render obedience: and indeedGod has sopropounded it. Ifmotivesmay be found in theWord to quicken us toobedience,thencertainlyWemaykeepthembeforeusinourobedience.ButGod haswithout doubt presented glory and heaven as amotive toquickenus to obedience, asmaybeproved fromRom.8. 13: ‘If ye liveafter the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit domortify the

deedsofthebody,yeshalllive.’Andagainin1Cor.15.58:‘Thereforebeye steadfast, immoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord,forasmuchasyeknowthatyourlabourisnotinvainintheLord.’Seealso2 Peter 1. 5-12, and 3. 14: ‘Seeing ye look for new heavens and a newearth,bediligentthatyemaybefoundofhiminpeace,withoutspotandblameless.’InGal.6.8-9alsoweread:‘Hethatsowethtothefleshshallofthefleshreapcorruption,buthethatsowethtotheSpiritshalloftheSpiritreaplifeeverlasting.Andletusnotbeweary inwelldoing; for indueseasonweshallreap, ifwefaintnot. ‘Also2Tim.2.12: ‘Ifwesufferwith him, we shall also reign with him.’ Therefore, God havingpropounded this as an incentive to obedience,wemay eye it and haverespecttoitinourobedience.

(2)ThatwhichthesaintsandpeopleofGodhaveeyedintheirobedience,We may eye also; and it is certain that they had respect unto therecompenseofthereward.WereadofMosesinHeb.11.25-26:‘Hechoserather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy thepleasures of sin for a season; esteeming the reproach of Christ greaterriches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto therecompense of the reward.’ But it may be said thatMoses was a manunderthelaw,andthathehadnotsofreeaspiritinserviceashavethosewhonowserveundertheGospel.Buttothisitmaybeansweredthathewascertainlyason,thoughunderage,andthathehadthefreespiritofgrace, else he couldhavehadno glory. Paul also commends this act ofMoses to show the greatness of his faith and obedience, and in thisrespecthesetsitforthforourimitation.Furthermore,weshallfindthatthosewhowereunder theGospelandwhoenjoyedabundanceofGod’sfree Spirit, yet had an eye to the same recompense of reward in theirobedience.WefindPaul,whohadasfreeandsincereprinciplesinhimasevermanhad,sayingofhimselfinPhil.3.13-14: ‘Iforgetallthingsthatarebehind, and I reach forthunto those things that arebefore. I presshardtothemark,fortheprizeofthehighcallingofGodinChristJesus.’SeealsoHeb.12.1-2.

ThusIhavesetforththevariousopinionsofothersandtheargumentsbywhichtheysupportthem.Now,bywayofreconciliation,andinordertoshowthatwhichImyselfapprehendtobethetruthinthiscontroversy,I

shallspeakofthreematters:whatismeantbyreward;whatismeantbytheeyeingofthereward;andwhethertheeyeingoftherewardisinanywayaninfringementofChristianfreedom.

WhatIsMeantbyRewards?

Firstweshallconsider,Whatismeantbyrewards?Rewardsmaybesaidtobeeithertemporal,orspiritual,oreternal.Temporalrewardsarethosemercieswhichweenjoyinthispresentlife,whetherpersonalorrelative,and these in turn may be positive or negative - health, comfort, food,raiment,house,shelter,riches,freedom,deliverance,andsoon.Spiritualrewards are the blessings which concern the soul - justification,sanctification,grace,theincreaseofgrace,victoryoverourlusts,comfort,peace, joy, communionwithGod. Eternal rewards,which are themainconsideration in this controversy, are glory, life, immortality, as theapostle names them in Rom. 2. 5-7: ‘God will render to every manaccordingtohisworks;tothemwhobypatientcontinuanceinwelldoingseek forgloryandhonourand immortality,eternal life.’ Inaword, thiseternal reward is the enjoyment of God, of Christ, of the Spirit. It isperfectfreedomfromsin,itisperfectholiness,itisindeedgraceglorified.Thisisthetrueeternalreward.Thismustsufficeforthefirstpoint.

WhatIsMeantbytheEyeingofRewards?

What ismeant, in thenextplace,by theeyeingof the reward? It is thephrase which the apostle uses of Moses who had respect unto therecompense of the reward (Heb. 11. 26). We must explain what isintendedbythis.Thereisathreefoldeye:theeyeofknowledge,wherebyamanseesandknowstheexcellencyofathing;theeyeoffaith,wherebyhebelievesthetruthofit,andhisinterestinit;andtheeyeofhope,andthereuponofpatienceandwaitinginexpectationfortheenjoymentofthepromise. In all these respects Moses may be said to have eyed therecompenseof the reward.Moseseyed itbyknowledge.Heknew thosethingswhichwerelaidupforhim.HesawHimthatwasinvisible,asthenextversetellsus.AndhesawthatthoserewardswhichGodhadlaidupforHispeopleweremuchtobepreferredtothepleasuresofsin.Healsohadtheeyeof faith,wherebyhewaspersuadedbothof the truthof the

promise,thatsuchthingswerereserved,andofhisownpartinthem,andthat he should possess this glory. Also, he had an eye of hope; he waswilling towait, and toexpect theenjoymentof all this.Hewaspatient.SeeHeb.10.36: ‘Yehaveneedofpatience, that,afteryehavedone thewillofGod,yemightreceivethepromise.’

For these reasons,Mosesesteemed the reproachofChrist above all thetreasuresofEgypt,for,saysthetext,hehadaneyetotherecompenseofthereward.What is that?Shallwesaythathehadrespect to thatglorywhichheshouldpurchaseorenjoybydoingthis,orfordoingthis?No!Itwas because he knew that the glory was reserved for him, because hebelievedthatheshouldpossessit,becausehehopedforitandexpectedit.That iswhyhedespisedtherichesandpleasuresoftheworld,asnotworthy tobecomparedwith it.Agreeable to this truthare thewordsofCol.3.23-24: ‘Whatsoeveryedo,do itheartily,as to theLord,andnotuntomen: knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of theinheritance:foryeservetheLordChrist.’SeealsoHeb.10.34:‘Knowinginyourselvesthatyehaveinheavenabetterandanenduringsubstance’.Thusmuchforthesecondmatter.

IstheEyeingofRewardsanInfringementofChristianLiberty?

Wenow come to the third point for consideration;whether to do dutywith an eye to the recompense of the reward is any infringement ofChristianfreedom.Ianswer:IfamanispreparedtolookatthematterasI have just been explaining it, and to consider the knowing and thebelieving and the hoping for that glory which God has promised thebeliever, then, I say, it isno infringementofourChristian liberty tododutywithaneyetotherecompenseofthereward.RatherwouldIsaythatherein our Christian liberty consists, that the knowledge, the faith, thepersuasion,thehopeandexpectationoftheglorywhichGodhasreservedforus,allconspiretoquickenusinourobedienceandtherebytomakeusfreeindeedinourobediencetoGod.

Inbrief,then,ifamanispreparedtotakethiseyeingoftherecompenseofrewardinthemannerwhichIhavesaid,thenamanmaydodutywithaneye to therecompenseof thereward.And indeedaChristianshould

act thus. Duty should be performed with the knowledge and faith andpersuasion thatGodwillblessusandneverdepart fromus indoingusgood.Weknow,too,thatGodisourfatherandthatHehaspardonedoursins.WeknowthatGodwillglorifyusat last.Withsuchknowledge,wearetoobeyandgiveupourselvestoall thewaysofobedience, loveandserviceofGod,astheapostlesays,‘Andwhatsoeveryedo,doitheartilytothe Lord, knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of theinheritance’(Col.3.23-24).If,ontheotherhand,amantakestheeyeingoftherewardtomeanthatitisamethodofobtainingtemporal,spiritual,and eternal mercies, then I must pause and answer by making somedistinctions.

1.Withreferencetotemporalblessings

Weshallconsiderthematterfirstinrespectoftemporalblessings.SomeaffirmthatitisrightthataChristianmanshoulddodutytoGodwithaviewtoreceiving fromGodHisoutwardmerciesand theenjoymentsofthispresent life.Iknowthatthisopinion isupheldbyholyand learnedmen,who,intheirownwalkneverthelessseemtopaybutscantheedtotherecompenseofreward.TheymaintainthatGodhaspropoundedtheserewards as motives and incentives to obedience, and that the best ofsaints have eyed them in their obedience; therefore they may do thesame.Totakeoffallsuspicionofmercenarinessofspiritinsodoing,theyareapttodistinguishbetweensupremegroundsandendsinservice,andsubordinategroundsandends.Theysaythatthoughthethingsofthislifemaybethesubordinategroundandendofsuchservice,yettheyarenottobetheultimateandsupremegroundandendsofservice.WemayeyethemwithreferenceandsubordinationtoGod’sgloryandourgoodandsalvation, but not so as to place them in the forefront, as if they wereabovethegloryofGodandoursalvation.Thesearetheusualcautionarydistinctionsputforwardbythemenwhoholdtothisposition.

I respect the persons and judgments of such men, although what Iadvancemaybesomewhatdifferent,yetIdonotsupposethat itwillbealtogethercontrarytothatwhichtheyhavemaintained.

Ishallat thispointre-state thequery,which is,whetheramanmaydo

dutyandobeyGodinreferencetoGod’sbestowingtemporalgoodthingsonhim.Iconceive,first,thatthemannamedinthequerymustbetakenforaChristianman,oramaninChrist.Ifthequeryisconcernedwithacarnalman, itmust be understood that such amanneither obeysGodfromrightprinciplesnoruponrightgrounds,norafterarightmannerforrightends.Wemaysayofallhisobediencethatitisbutcarnal.Themanhascarnalprinciples,grounds,andendsinallthathedoes.ItmaytrulybesaidofhimwhatGodsaidof theJewswhenthey fastedandprayed,theydidnotatalldothisasuntoGod-seeHosea7.14:‘Theyassemblethemselves for corn and wine, and they rebel against me’. These Jewsmerelysoughtbelly-blessings;selfwastheground,andselfwastheendofall.TheydidnotserveGodbecauseofwhatHeis inHimself,butfortheir own advantage. They sought notHimbutHis, aswith thosewhofollowedtheLordbecausetheydideatoftheloavesandwerefilled.Thereare many thousands who are moved, not by any inward spring ofobedience,butbytheseoutwardmatters.Aswithaclockwhichisworkedbyoutwardweightsandcannotmovewhenthesearetakenaway,soitiswith suchmen,who stand still and cannot stir. The carnal heart cries,‘Whowill showusanygood?’Theycountgodlinessnogain, if theycanmake no gain of godliness. If, instead of gain, they meet with loss; if,instead of advantage, theymeet with persecution; if, instead of a goodname,theymeetwithreproachforChrist;thentheyimmediatelycastoffreligionandobedience.Theytakeupwithreligionmerely toservetheirownends,andforsimilarendstheydisclaimit.HethatwillserveGodforsomethingwillservethedevilformore.Ifhecanincreasehiswages,heisfor anymaster.Therefore, by ‘man’ in thequery, I conceive ismeant aChristianman,oramaninChrist.

By the ‘good things’ of the query, I conceive is meant outward goodthings, those things which the world reckons and esteems to be goodthings,asriches,honour,greatness,applause;atleast,acompetencyandasufficiencyoftemporalandoutwardgoodthings.

ByservingGodorperformingdutytoGod,asmentionedinthequery,Iconceive ismeantall actsofobedience,notonlyoutwardconformity toGod’srequirements,butinwardsubjectiontothelawsandcommandsofChrist.

Bytheeyeingofthesetemporalgoodthingsinservice,Iconceive isnotmeantthemakingofthesethingseitherthemainreasonsforservice,orthe supreme and primary ends and aims of service, for that would beabominable, but the having a respect unto the enjoyment of temporalgoodasasubordinatereasonforservingGod,andameansofquickeningtheChristianmaninworking.Thus,then,wehaveexaminedthenatureofthequery.Ishallnowcometotheanswer,andinthisIhopethatthethreefollowingparticularswillbeagreed:

(i)Thattheenjoymentofthesegoodthingsinthislifeisnotthegroundofa Christian man’s obedience. They are not that which sets him to doservice toGod, even though theymayquickenhim in service.Theyarenot the spring ofmotion.At themost they are but oil to thewheels tokeep them in motion and to inspire motion. I conceive that there areseveralgroundsofChristianobedience:

i. The binding grounds. The Christian obeys because God hascommanded,aswehave it inPs.119.4-5: ‘Thouhastcommandedustokeep thy precepts diligently.O thatmywayswere directed to keep thystatutes!’

2.Theenablinggrounds.TheChristianmanisenabledtoobeybecauseofhis implantation intoChrist.AswithoutChristhecandonothing,so inChristhe is createduntogoodworks, andhe cando all things throughChristwhostrengthenshim.TheChristianman is alsoenabled toobeybecause of the implantation of Christ into him, which is called theformingofChristinthesoul,thenewman,thelawwrittenintheheart,the new creatures, faith and love, whereby he is enabled to obeyGod’sprecepts.His faith enableshim - by faithAbrahamobeyed - andloveconstrainshim.

3. The impelling grounds. These may rather be termed motives toobedience.ThemanobeysbecauseGodisgood,andbecauseHeisgoodtohim.God’sgoodnessisamotive,andHisgraceistheChristianman’sstrength.

(2)Itwillbeagreedtoo,doubtless,thattheenjoymentoftemporalgoodisnottheimmediateendofaChristian’sobedience,for, ifso, itrenders

him servile andmercenary in his obedience, and not son-like and free.Indeed, such endsmay be themark of the carnalman, but not of thegodly.Thegodlyhavehigherendsthanthese.Theseendsaretoolowforthenobleandroyalspiritsofsaints.

(3)Itwillbeagreed,too,thattemporalgoodthingsarenotthemainendsofaChristian’sobedience.Hehashigherendsthanthese.Hehasamorenoble spirit, a more free-born soul, than will permit him to makeanythinghereceivesfromGodthemainendofhisobediencetoGod.

So far there is general agreement.All the controversy is about thenextpoint.Idesiretopropounditinallmodestyfortheconsiderationofthosewhoareofdifferentjudgmentinthematter.

WearetoconsiderwhethertheperformancebyaChristianmanofdutytoGodmayhavereferencetoGod’sbestowalofoutwardmerciesonhimin this life, considered as a subordinate end. Consider the followingpoints:

(i)Tobeobedienttodutybythepromptingofatemporalrewardseemsto belong to thework of the law as a schoolmaster. In time of law thegodly seemed to be moved to the ways of obedience by promises oftemporalblessing,andGodseemedtopropoundtothemasmenunderagethepromisesoftemporalgoodthingstotemptthemontoobedience:asappearsinDeuteronomy,chapter29.Certainly,theenjoymentofthesetemporalthingswasnottheonlyendoftheirobedience,thoughsomeofthemmayhavehad thespiritof theSadduceeswhosaid that theykeptthe lawandobserved it inorder thatGodmightbless them,and that itmightgowellwiththeminthislife.Yetallwerenotofthisspirit,norwastheenjoymentoftemporalgoodthemainreasonfortheirobedience,anymorethanitisours.Itwasbutasubordinateend;Godneverpropoundedit,nordidgodlymeneyeitasthemainendoftheirobedience.ButGoddealswiththemaswiththoseininfancy,asunderage.Heleadsthemon,and allures themby such considerations as these, for they had not themeasure and abundance of the Spirit whichHe bestows onHis peoplenowundertheGospel.

(2)Dutydoneforreward,evenasasubordinateend,seemstolaydowna

rule for God to follow. It seems to limit God, and to depart fromsubmissiontoHiswisdominHisdisposalofus.

(3)ItalsoseemstopropoundthatwhichGodhasnotpropounded.

(4)Also, the temporalgood things forwhich theman looksmaynotbegranted,andsofarasobediencedependsonthem,ittoowillfail.

(5)Itishardtohaveaneyetotherewardoftemporalgood,andyetforourservicetobefree.

(6) I conceive that it is safer to find arguments to quicken us in ourobedience from themerciesofGodbestoweduponus,ormadeours inthepromisetofaith,thantofindargumentstoobeyfromtheexpectationofmerciestobebestowedastherewardofourobedience.Itseemsbetterto say thatWearenot toobey inorder thatGodmaybestowblessingsuponus,butratherthatweobeyfromtheknowledge,thefaith,andthepersuasion,thatGodwillblessushereandforever.It isthis latterthatquickensustoobeyGod.

The apostle seems to speak after this manner in 2 Cor. 7. 1: ‘Havingthereforethesepromises,dearlybeloved,letuscleanseourselvesfromallfilthinessofthefleshandspirit,perfectingholinessinthefearofGod.’Hearguesherefrommercytoduty,notfromdutytomercy.Hereasonsherefrom the enjoyment of promises to the performance of obedience:,Having therefore such promises, let us obey’. Likewise in Col. 3. 24:,Whatsoeveryedo,doitheartilyastotheLordandnottomen;knowingthatoftheLordyeshallreceivetherewardoftheinheritance.’Heretheapostle enforces the duty from the persuasion and knowledge ofChristiansthatGodwillassuredlybestowtheblessingsonthem.So,too,inHeb. 10. 34: Ye took joyfully the spoiling of your goods, knowing inyourselves that yehave in heaven a better and an enduring substance.’However, Iamnot todealat thispointwitheternal,butwith temporalrewards,andIurgetheseScripturesnofurtherthantostrengthenwhatIsaidbefore,thatitisbettertosayweobeyfrommerciespromisedratherthantosaythatweobtainmerciesbyourobedience.Certainitisthatthelesswe seek to obtainmercies because of our obedience themore willGod have an eye to our obedience; the less regard we have to the

temporalrewards inourservice, themorewillGodhaverespect to thatservice; the lesswemake temporalblessings theendofourservice, themorevaluewillGodseeinthatservice.Indeedtheenjoymentofoutwardthings seems tome to be too low a principle of action in a Christian’sobedience.Theapostle says,,We looknotat the thingswhichare seen,but at the thingswhich arenot seen: for the thingswhich are seen aretemporal;butthethingswhicharenotseenareeternal’(2Cor.4.18).

But it may be objected that God has promised all good things toobedience,as theapostle tellsus in 1Tim.4.8: ‘Godliness isprofitableuntoallthings,havingpromiseofthelifethatnowis,andofthatwhichistocome’;andthereforeitisrighttoobeywithrespecttotheenjoymentoftheseblessings.

BeforeIanswerthisobjection,Iwillpropoundonething,andquerytwo.ThatwhichIpropoundisthis:WhetheritwerenotbettertoexpressthematterbysayingthatGodhaspromisedtotheobedientallgoodthings,ratherthantosaythatHehaspromisedthemtoobedience.ThisIsuggestthe more especially, if that be a truth, that God’s promises under thecovenantofgracearenotmadetothework,buttotheworker;nottotheaction,but to thepersonperforming it. Iamsure thatourdivineshavedrawn this one great difference between the covenants of work and ofgrace, that in thecovenantofworksmadewithAdam, thepromisewasmade to thework,not to theperson;whereas in the covenantof grace,thepromiseismadetotheperson,nottothework.

ThetwothingsIqueryarethese:

1.Whetherthatwhichtheapostlecalls‘thepromiseofthislife’,andthatwhichisexpressedintheObjectionunderthenameof‘goodthings’,areexpressionswhichpointtothesamething.

2.Whetherby‘goodthings’ismeantthosethingswhicharegoodintheeyesofmen,orthosethingswhicharegoodintheestimationofGod.Inother words, whether is meant those things which are good inthemselves,or else those thingswhichGod inHiswisdomknows to begoodforus.

If ‘good things’ is taken at large and indefinitely, the first part of theObjection is granted; thatGod has promised to the obedient, or to theobedientintheirobedience,allgoodthings.ItisHispromiseasgiveninPs.84.11:‘Nogoodthingwillhewithholdfromthemthatwalkuprightly’.Nay,wehaveHiscovenant,inJer.3240:‘Iwillneverdepartfromthemtodothemgood’.Butifitisdecidedthat‘goodthings’onlyreferstothosethingswhich are positively good, those thingswhich theworld esteemsgood,anddoesnotincludewantsaswellasenjoyments,straitsaswellasfulness,povertyaswellasprosperity,asamongthe‘goodthings’,thenIsaythatGodhasmadenosuchpromisetotheChristian,norcanwetrulyinterpret the promise after this fashion. If it were a promise made toobedienceandgodliness,andifitweretobeinterpretedinthisway,thensurelytheapostlesthemselveswouldhavebeensharersinit.ButChristtells them plainly ‘that they should be hated of allmen for his name’ssake, and should be brought before princes, cast into prison, andpersecuted’,andthatthosewhodidsuchthingstothemwouldthinkthattheydidGodgoodservice(Matt.10.18,22;Luke12.11;John16.2).Andthe apostle tells us: The Holy Ghost witnesseth… that bonds andafflictions abideme’ (Acts 20. 23).He adds:’If in this life onlywehavehope in Christ, we are of allmenmostmiserable’ (1 Cor. 15. 19). Andthesethingswetooaretoexpectandreckonon,accordingtothesayingof the apostle: ‘All that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall sufferpersecution’ (2 Tim. 3. 12). Also, ‘Throughmany tribulations we mustenterintothekingdomofGod’(Acts14.22).ChristHimselftellsusthatifwe will follow Him, we must take up our cross daily (Luke 9. 23).Therefore it is certain that if by ‘the promise of this life’, ismeant thegood things of this life, and if by the good things of this life is meantoutwardenjoyments, thenIsay, there isnosuchpromisemadehere toobedience.

But it may be asserted that the Scripture says, ‘If ye be willing andobedient, ye shall eat the good of the land’, and therefore temporalblessingsarepromisedinreturnforobedience.Ireply:IfitbeadmittedthattheJews(thoughunderthecovenantofgrace)wereatthesametimeunder a different covenant from us, a subservient covenant as I havealready showed, inwhichGod promised outwardmercies to obedienceand threatened afflictions to the disobedient, then my answer is soon

made.Davidmightwellsaythatheneversawtherighteousforsaken,northeir seed begging bread, for outward mercies were the conditionsannexedtotheirobedienceandtoGod’spartinthecovenant,andthesefailednottothemthatobeyed.Butwhateveritwasthen,itisnotsonow.Thosewhoarewillingandobedientdonotnoweatthegoodoftheland.Indeed, it may be that they are in the greatest outward trouble andnecessity,whereastheywhodowickedlyprosper.

WhereisitthatGodhasmadethepromiseoftemporalgoodnowundertheGospel?Ifso,whyisitnotuniversalandinfallibleinitsapplication?Why do not those who are willing and obedient enjoy it, and not onlysome,butallofthem?Forpromisesarenotmadetoparticularpersons,buttothewholebodyofChrist.Indeed,Godtellsusnowthattheythatwill live godlymust suffer persecution, and through many tribulationsmust they enter into the kingdom of God. Yet this remains firm in allconditions,thatGodwillneverdepartfromusorfromdoingusgood.Hewillneverleaveusnorforsakeus.InblessingHewillblessus.AllthingsshallworktogetherforthegoodofthemthatloveGod.Thisstandsfirmand immoveable toall saints.Heavenandearthshall soonerpassawaythanonetittleofthispromisefail.

Butanotherobjectionmayberaised.Itmaybesaidthat,ifblessingsarenotpromisedtoobedience,andifGoddoesnotrewardobedience, thenby the rule of contraries, punishments are not threatened against sin,neitherdoesGodpunish for sin. I answerbriefly:Godmaypunish sin,andyetnotrewardobedience. Inourobedience,even if itwereperfect,wedobutwhatweshoulddo,asChristhintstousinLuke17.10:‘Whenye shallhavedoneall those thingswhichare commandedyou, say.Weareunprofitableservants;wehavebutdonethatwhichwasourduty todo.’Butwhenwesinwedothatwhichweshouldnotdo;andthereforemayGodpunishtheone,andyetnotrewardtheother.Thepunishmentof our sin is but the just demerit of our evil; but the reward of ourobedienceisthegiftofHisownmercy.Theapostletellsusthiswhenhesays:‘Thewagesofsinisdeath,butthegiftofGodiseternallifethroughJesusChristourLord’(Rom.6.23).ManmayprovokeGodtoshowHisjustice,buthecannottemptGodtoshowmercy.OursinsdrawoutHisjustice,butHismercy is the issueofHisownheart.Wecando that for

whichGodmaydamnus,butwecannotdothatforwhichHemaysaveus.Thusitwillappearthat,thoughthetwopartsoftheargumenttakenseparatelymay be granted to be true, yet the conclusion that is drawnfromthelinkingofthemtogetherliesopentojustexception.

Butagain,itisgrantedthatblessingsarepromisedtoobedience,andthatpunishmentsarethreatenedtosin.Butshallwejudgenothingtohavethenature of blessing but the enjoyment of temporal and outward goodthings?Maynotlossesbeblessingsaswellasenjoyments?Andmaynotenjoyments be punishments, when yet losses are blessings? Certainlytheymaybe so in truth, thoughnot inname.Theymaybe so inGod’sintention,thoughnotinourapprehension.Andtospeaktruth,nothingisagainstusbutwhatisanobstacletooureternalhappiness,andnothingisforusbutwhatisadvantageoustoit.

Oncemore: It isgranted thatGodrewardsobedienceandpunishessin.But it is one thing forGod to reward obedience, and another thing formantohaveaneyetorewardinhisobeying.Itisgrantedthatrewardistheoutcomeofthework,butitisdisputedwhetheritshouldbetheendwhichtheworkerhasinview,andupontheconsiderationspropounded.AndthoughGodrewardsobedienceandpunishessin,yet,justaswedonotavoidsinbecauseoftemporalpunishment,sowedonotperformdutyfor the sake of reward. I say ‘reward’, in the sense of temporalenjoyments.Iamunwillingforanythingtobeintroducedasamotiveforthe obedience of a godly man which is either unsuitable, too low, oruncertain,andtemporalrewardsseemstobesuch.Theyareunsuitedtothe spirit which underlies the godly man’s service, and they have thenatureofuncertainty,forwehavenoabsolutepromiseofthem.Iftherebesuchapromise,whyisitnotbothuniversalandinfallible?Thismuchmustserveforanswertothefirstpartoftheobjection.

Wenowcometothesecondpart,whichisinferredfromthefirst:thatifGodhaspromisedallgoodthingstoobedience,thenwemayobeywitharegard to the enjoyment of them. I answer by way of denial of thisconsequence, for,evenif itbeadmittedthatGodhaspromisedall goodthings(the‘goodthings’tobeinterpretedasbefore)toobedience,yet itdoes not follow that the godly are to obey God with a regard to theenjoymentofthem.Evenifwegrantthattheapostle,wherehespeaksof

‘godliness’ (as being profitable for this life) means ‘obedience’, orgodliness in practice, and by ‘the things of this life’ hemeans ‘all goodthings’,andthesewerethingspositivelygood,yetwemustnotobeythatthepromisemaybefulfilledtous.Rather,havingthispromise,wemustbe quickened to obey. Certainly the apostle’s reasoning is the bestreasoning;andhereasonsthus:‘Havingthereforethesepromises,dearlybeloved, let us cleanseourselves fromall filthiness of the flesh and thespirit’(2Cor.7.1).Hedoesnotbidthegodlydothisthattheymayhavesuchpromises;but,astheyhavesuchpromises,letthemobey.Letitnotbe thought that Iwouldhold thebelieverback fromobedience, or takeaway an incentive to obedience, or speak against that which wouldquickenhim toobey.But this I say, that thepromise of temporal goodthings, such as riches and prosperity, does not belong to the believerunder the Gospel; in its place is mercy and blessing. Furthermore, Iconceivethatitisafargreateradvantagetoobedience,andafargreaterspur and incentive to obedience, to consider the promise as alreadymade, so that we are not to obey that we may have the promise, but,having the promise (and in 2 Cor. 7. 1 the apostle speaks of ‘thepromises’),howmuchmoreshouldWeobeyit!Tothefurtherobjectionthat, thoughwearenottoobeythatwemayhavethepromise,butthatweshouldobeywithaviewtoreceivingthegoodthings includedinthepromise,Iwouldreplythus:

The things of this life are no part, not so much as a pin, of theworkmanshipofagracioussoul.TheyaretoolowtomoveonewheelofaChristian’sframe.Atbesttheyarebutoiltothewheel,andoilisnotthesourceofmotion,butmerelyahelp inmotion.Thethingsof thisworldcanneitherbe the reasonnor theobject of the obedience of a graciousheart. They neither set us to work, nor do they keep us working. Theenjoymentofthemmaycomeintoquickenustowork,andinwork;butthat is all. ‘If thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light’(Matt. 6. 22). Likewise the contrary is true. If the eye is double, if ouraimsandendstaketheplaceofGod,thewholemanisdarkness.Inbrief,thelessrespectwehavetotemporalblessingsinourobedience,themorefree and noble is our obedience. It is as one says of desire: ‘He thatdesiresthisonaccountofthat,doesnotdesirethis,butthat.’Soitiswithhim that obeys in the hope and expectation of receiving outward

blessings:eitherhewouldnotobey,orhewouldnotsocheerfullyobey,iftherewerenosuchgoodthingstobeenjoyed.

Butsomemaysay that thegodlymaypray for theseoutwardblessings,andthereforetheymayperformdutyinrespectofthem.Ianswer:itdoesnot so follow. The requirements of our duty and the reasons for theperformance of our duty are different matters.We grant that outwardthingsmayberequestedbyusinourprayers,buttheydonotconstitutethe true ground of our praying. Besides, we must distinguish betweenthatwhich is the truemotive of ourChristian life as awhole, and thatwhichmayconstitutethemotiveandendofaparticularduty.Thelattermaybepromptedbythehopeofoutwardandearthlygood.Thuswemaylawfully go to prayer for this end, to make known to the Lord ourtemporal necessities. Nay, our present wants may be the main andparticulargroundforperformingaparticulardutyatacertaintime.Butnohopeofworldlyandoutwardblessingcanbethehingeuponwhichthewhole frameofourChristian lifemoves.Outwardblessingsmaybe thegroundofparticularacts,butnotthemain-springofthewhole.Theymaybetheparticularendofaparticularduty,butnotthegeneralendofthewholecourseofourobedience.

Thismust suffice for the firstbranchofourquery:whetheramanmaynot obey God in reference to God’s bestowing of outwardmercies andenjoyments here and now. In a word, it seems more agreeable to theGospel,andtotheframeofaChristiansoul,tosaythatweoughttoobeyGod upon the knowledge, the belief, and the persuasion that God willblessusandthatHewillwithholdnogoodthingfromus,thantosaythatwe are to obey God that we may gain good temporal things by ourobedience. I shall prosecute this matter no further. If, in that which Ihavewritten,Ihavedifferedfromothers,itisnotindisrespecttootherswhosejudgmentsIrespect,andIhopetheywillmakeallowanceformeifIhavedissentedfromtheiropinionsonreasonablegrounds.

Withreferencetospiritualbenefits

Wenow proceed to the secondmain branch of the query propounded:Whetherwearetododutieswithreferenceandrespecttotheobtaining

ofspiritualgoodthings.Somedivinessaythatwearenottosuggestanyrespectsor endsatall in thedoingofduty.Theynot only excludebaseends,carnalpurposes,andsecularadvantages,buttheyexcludealsothehighestandnoblestends.Theytellusplainlythatwearenottohumbleourselves,fast,andpray,forthepreventionofanyevil,ortheprocuringofanygood.Nay, theygoyethigherandsay thatwearenot tododutywithrespecttotheobtainingofanyspiritualgood,suchaspardon,peace,joy,assurance,thelightofGod’scountenance,thesubduingoflusts,andall else. In so saying, such men propound an irrational opinion whichstrips men of their reason (for if you take away the end which everyreasonablecreature,asareasonablecreature,proposestohimselfinhisactions, youbringmandown to the level of the beasts). Yet suchmen,that they may seem to be reasonable in their paradox, give us twogroundsforit:

1.TheytellusthatwemustnotthinkthatwecanpurchasebyourprayersanddutiesthatwhichhasbeenpurchasedalreadyforusbyChrist.Christ,theysay,hasfullypurchasedallthatweneed-pardon,peace,joy,andallgood.Thereforenomoreisrequired.

2.TheytellusfurtherthatallspiritualblessingsaresufficientlyprovidedforusinChrist,andthatGodhasdecreedallgoodthingsforusinChrist.Thereforewemustnotthinkthatwecangetthembyourprayers.

Thesearethetworeasonsonwhich(mayIsay itwithoutoffence?) thisunreasonableanddestructiveopinionseemstobefounded.

CertainlyIneednotsaymuchagainstthisopinion,forif itbebuttwicerepeated,itwillbeasgoodasaconfutationofit.Indeed,ifthisopinionbe a truth,wemust have anotherBible to countenance it.What dowereadofmorefrequentlythanthis:‘Calluponmeinthedayoftrouble,andIwilldeliverthee’(Ps.50.15);‘Ask,anditshallbegivenyou;seek,andyeshallfind;knock,anditshallbeopeneduntoyou’(Luke11.9)?Doesnottheapostledesirethemtoprayforhim?andforwhatend?Hetellsthem-‘thatutterancemaybegivenuntome,thatImayopenmymouthboldly,tomakeknownthemysteryoftheGospel’(Eph.6.19).Doeshenotaskanotherchurchtopraythathemaybedeliveredfromunreasonableandwickedmen?(2Thess.3.2).DoesnotJamesbidus,ifwebesick,tosend

fortheeldersofthechurch:andwhy?Toprayforus.Andwhypray?Thatwemaybehealed!‘Prayforoneanother,thatyemaybehealed’(James5.16).

But I am weary of this contention. In almost every place in Scripturewhereadutyiscommanded,thereisanendpropounded.Andwhatcanbe more destructive to grace and to reason than such an opinion? Itwouldbenomoreabsurdtoreason,tosaythatwemustnoteattosatisfyourhunger,drinktosatisfyourthirst,feedtonourishourselves,butthatWearetofeedoutofmereinstinct,asdothebeasts,notfromreasonablemotivesasmen.Butwhat?arewetododutyfornoreasonatall?Maywenotconfesssinthatwemaybehumbledandmadesensibleofit?Maywenot hear the Word that our understandings may be bettered, ouraffections quickened, our faith strengthened? Surely the objectorspropoundtheseendsintheirownpreaching,otherwisewhydotheygotosomuchpainstopersuade(Idonotsayconvince)men’sunderstandingsthattheyareinerror?Andmaywenotuseordinancesfortheincreaseofour graces, and for the abatement and weakening of our corruptions?Andmay we not do works of charity to refresh the poor?May we notrelieve thosewhoare in extremities?Andarenot these ends?And is itnotthesamewithotherduties?

But if all this shouldbedenied, yet thismuchwill be agreed,wehope,that wemay do duty andwalk in the ways of obedience, to adorn ourprofession,todignifytheGospel,toglorifyGod,tobenefitthesaints,andto win others. And are not these ends? And were not these as muchpurchased by Christ, and provided for by God, as the other? Sure it isthat,muchaswehaveneedofGod,somuchthemorehasGodnoneedofus.Hisglory,HisGospel,Hiscausedoesnotdependuponus.Godcouldadvance this, and maintain the other, without us. And therefore, howlittleofmen,howlittleofGod,howlittleofreason,howlittleofScripturethereisinsuchatenet,Ileavetoalltojudge.

Butyet,thattheirshowofreasonmaynotgowithoutananswer,Ishallsayonefurtherwordtothem.Itisthis:AlthoughChristhaspurchasedallgoodthingsforus,yetitpleasedGodtobestowtheminawayofseeking.We see this in Ezek. 36. 37 (which follows upon the most free andabsolute promises): ‘I will yet for this be inquired of by the house of

Israel, to do it for them’. God promised to bestow the blessings, andpromised (likeHimself) tograntall freelywithoutany respect toman’sdeserts,asHetellstheminverse32:,NotforyoursakesdoIthis,saiththeLordGod,beitknownuntoyou’.No!ItwasforHisownName’ssake.And yet He tells them in the words just quoted: ‘I will yet for this beenquiredofbythehouseofIsraeltodoitforthem’.Allthisplainlyshowsthat, though God had promised, and promised freely, to bestow thesethingsonthem,yetHewouldbestowtheminawayofseeking.

We say yet again, that thoughGodwill bestowgood things in away ofbelievingandpraying,yet theyarenot thepurchaseofourprayers,butthe gift ofHis ownmercy. And I appeal to all,whether they have everheardanyconscientiousministeroftheGospeltosaythatprayerwasthemeritingcauseofanymercy?Dideverany say thatdutycame inasaninfluential cause for the grantingof anymercy?Has itnotalwaysbeenshown as a subservientmeans, not as a procuring cause, of anymercyfromGod?WhenGodhasapurposetogive,Hestirsupthehearttoseek,and this stirring up of the heart to seek is an evidence that He has apurposetobestow.HelovestobestowHismercyinawayofseeking,thatwemaybeencouragedtocometoHim,andtoregardourblessingsasthefruitsofprayerandtheperformancebyGodofHispromisestous.

Butperhapsitwillbesaid:Iftheseblessingsarefreelypromised,whyisthereaconditionattachedtothebestowingofthem?Ianswerthus:Sometherearethatsaythat, thoughGod’spromisesarefree inrespectof themakingofthem,yettheyareconditionalinrespectoftheperformanceofthem.Though theyaremade fromsheermercy, yetGod fulfils them inrelationtotheperformanceofoursubservientduty.Ifwedobutaddtothisthetruththatthesubservientconditionordutywhichisprerequisitetotheperformanceofthepromise,isnothingofourbringingbutfirstofGod’s bestowing, I do not see how this statement in any way detractsfromthefreedomofGod’sgraceeitherinthemakingortheperformingofthepromise.

Totakean instance:Godtellsus thatHewillgivetohimthat isathirst(Rev.21.6).Here is a conditionorqualification.Yet this doesnot takeawayfromthefreenessofgrace.Notwithstandingthisqualification,GodtellsusthatHegivestohimthatisathirst,andwhatcanbefreerthana

gift?Ashasbeensaid,Godgivesboththegraceofdesiring,andthegracedesired.‘Gift’impliesfreenessofgrace.ButsomemaystillobjectandsaythatitcannotbeagiftifGodrequiresthirst.Thisqualification,theysay,impliesittobenogiftofgrace.Tosetthisaside,Godhasbeenpleasedtoadd to the formerword ‘gift’ this otherword ‘freely’.Twillgive tohimthat isathirstof the fountainof thewaterof life freely.’Thus it is clearthatgrace is foundhere inall itsplenitude.ThatwhichGodrequiresassubservient to the promise is not of our bringing, till first of God’sbestowing;notofourpurchasing,butofGod’sgiving.GodhasengagedHimself by covenant, not only to give the promise, but to give alsowhatever is required as necessary and subservient to the promise. IfindeedtherehadbeenanythingrequiredwhichwasofourbringingandwhichwasnotfirstofallofGod’sbestowing,itwouldhavegonecontraryto grace andwouldhave altered the nature of the thing. Itwould havemadethattobeman’sbypurchasewhichwasofGod’sgift,eventhoughwhatwebroughtborenoproportiontothatwhichGodgave.Ifsomuchasonepennyisrequiredofusforthepurchaseofakingdom,thoughthisfallsinfinitelyshortofthetrueworthofthekingdom,yetthisaltersthenatureofthething,andmakesthatapurchasewhichwithoutthatwouldbe a gift. So here. If any thing is required of us which is not of God’sgiving and bestowing, though the thing required of us were never sosmall, yet itwouldalter thenatureof thegift andmakegrace tobenograce.ButwhenthatwhichisofourbringingistrulyofGod’sbestowingandgiving, thenatureof thegift remains,and there isno infringementuponthefreenessofgrace.IfGodrequiresfaithinamantoclosewiththepromise,andgiveshimthefaithtoclosewiththepromise,certainlythisis no prejudice to grace. The prophet Isaiah says: ‘In the Lord have Irighteousnessandstrength’(45.24)-righteousnesstothosethatbelieveonHim,andstrengthtoenable themtocometoHim.Astheseasendsoutwaters to fetchus to it, soGod sendsout strength fromHimself todrawustoHimself.Andsoallisofgrace,whichcannowaybegrace,ifitbenoteverywaytrulygrace.

Andifpromisesofgrace,thoughabsoluteandfreeinthemselves,yetareconditional in respect of their fulfilment,muchmoremay I say this ofpromisesofcomfort,peace,andjoy.Ifthiswerebutacknowledged,mencertainly would not run upon these rocks, that a believer immediately

following upon an act of sin,may take comfort and hearGod speakingpeaceinthepromise.Itisclaimedthathemaythenhearallthegraciouslanguageofheaven,asthoughhehadnotsinned.Itisthefailureofmento see that, in a certain way, promises are conditional, that inevitablycarriesmenonsuchrocksas these.Yet I say, and sayagain, that thesepromisesareconditionalinrespectoftheirfulfilment,whatevertheyareintheirownnature.Itisforthisreasonthatwedodutiesassubservientmeans for the bringing about of their fulfilment. Not that duty is thecause of their fulfilment, or that it has any causal influence leading tofulfilment,but that it is the subservientmeans for the obtaining of thethingswhichGodhasfreelypromised.GodhaspromisedthesethingstoHispeople,andthisisthewayinwhichHewillfulfilthem,ashetellsus:‘Hemeetethhimthatrejoicethandworkethrighteousness ’ (Isa.64.5).Andagain:tohim,thatorderethhisconversationarightwillIshowthesalvationofGod’(Ps.50.23).Andagain:‘Asmanyaswalkaccordingtothis rule, peace be on them’ (Gal. 6. 16). Thus we see that the way inwhichGodperforms thesepromises is in awayofduty andobedience.And therefore may we do duty with respect to the enjoyment of thepromises.

Butthereisafurtherobjectionwhichmustbeanswered.Somemenwillsay that that which is the fruit of grace and justification cannot be acondition preceding grace and justification; but to perform dutyacceptablyisaconsequenceofourjustificationandtheworkofgraceinus;itcannotthereforebesaidtobeaprecedentcondition.

All our learned and holy writers, speaking against the Papists in theirtreatises against justification by works, are agreed that the acceptableperformance of duty by the godly is a fruit of their justification. Forinstance, Augustine says, ‘Good works follow justification; they do notprecede justification’; and again he says, ‘While we see good workswroughtbymen,weseefaithwroughtinmen.’AmongotherargumentsagainstthePapists,thisappears.Ifwearejustifiedbeforewecanwork,thenWearenotjustifiedbyourworks.ButWearesojustified;thereforewecannotbejustifiedbyourworks.Thatwearejustifiedbeforewecanwork, theScripture sets forthplainly. It tellsus thatwithoutChristWecandonothing,andthatWearecreatedinChristJesusuntogoodworks

(Eph. 2. 10): that in ourselveswe are but deadmen, that all our life isfromChrist,andthatwecanhavenolifefromChristuntilwehaveunionwithhim:for‘hethathaththeSonhathlife,andhethathathnottheSonofGodhathnotlife’(1John5.12).Andassoonasthereislifeandunionthere is justification, for the gift of life and the justification aresimultaneous,thoughinorderofnatureonemaybeconceivedbeforetheother. It has been rightly said: let us work from justification, not forjustification.‘

It will be said, however, that if this argument is true which we thusoppose to the teachings of thePapists, thatWemust notwork thatwemay be justified, but must be justified that we may work, then theperformance of duties cannot be said to be thepreceding condition forreceivingblessing,seeing that theblessingsare the subsequent fruitsofgrace and justification. Thus have I raised this objection to the utmostheightIcan,andpresented it in thebest light.Andat thisheightIhadthoughttohavedealtwithit.ButIfindthatit leadsintomanyintricatequestionswhicharefitterfordiscussioninaseparatetreatiseratherthandealtwithhere.Butifbetterandmoreablehandsdonotundertakeit(itis my earnest desire that they may), then possibly God may affordopportunitytome,onewhoisthemostunworthyofthosethatlabourintheGospel,tospeaksomethingonsuchasubjectasthis.InthemeantimeIshallpropoundafewthingsforseriousandthoroughconsideration:

First,Is itnotpossiblethattheconditionsforblessingwhichhavebeenconsidered are both conditions that precede blessing and also thesubsequent fruits of grace? This will especially appear if we look uponthem as conditions of God’s bestowing before anything of ourselvesentersintothemsoastomakethemappeartobequalificationsforgrace.Maytheynotbequalificationswhichwereceivefromgrace,andindeedgraceinthemselves,presupposingtheexistenceoffaith?

Secondly,Weshouldinquirewhetheritispossibletodrawgoodandsafedistinctions between the qualifications in or by which a soul comes toChrist(namely,asenseofneed,hungerandthirst,andspiritualpoverty:Matt.11.28and5.3-6)andthequalification,namelyfaith,whichactuallybrings the soul to Christ. And is it possible to call the first thequalifications of grace, and the second the qualifications to grace,

especially if it be admitted that these qualifications to grace are not ofman,thoughinman?

Thirdly,LetusinquirewhethertherearenotsomeworksinpreparationforgracewhichmaybesaidtobefromtheSpiritbutyetarenotwiththeSpirit; that is, which proceed from the Spirit of sanctification, and yettheyarenotwiththesanctifyingSpirit:evenasthelightofthemorningisfromthesun,yetnotwiththesun.

Fourthly,WeshouldinquirewhetheritisorisnottruethatChristcomesnottousbeforeHecomesintous.HavewesomekindoflifefromChristbeforewecometoliveinChristorChristcomestoliveinus?

Fifthly, We should inquire whether we may rightly draw distinctionsbetweenactiveandpassivepreparationsforreceivinglifeinChrist.Maywe rightly understand as ‘passive’ preparations the emptying us of sinandselfbytheSpiritofGod?andas‘active’preparationsthebegettinginus of desires and hungerings and thirstings after Christ by the sameSpirit? And do both kinds of preparation presuppose the existence offaithandofChristinthesoul?HasChristenteredthesoul,aslightentersintoadark room,dispelling rather thanexpelling thedarkness,drivingout the darkness by His entrance rather than throwing out darknessbeforeHeenters?

Sixthly, We should also consider whether certain learned men, inspeakingof thepassive andactive receptionofChrist by the soul, havethereby drawn a safe distinction; alsowhether in the one case the soulreceivesChristasadeadmanreceives life, intheother,asa livingmanreceives food; alsowhether the onemaybe called the soul’s interest inChristandtheotherthemanifestationofthatinterest.Ifthesethingsareso,itmayfurtherbeconsideredwhethermanyofthosethingswhicharesaid to be preparations for the reception of Christ by the soul do notactually presuppose Christ to be already in us, and do not precede thesoul’s interest inHim,thoughtheydoprecedethemanifestationof thatinterest.

Seventhly,ItistobeconsideredwhethertheorderofGod’sworkingmaynotdifferfromthatwhichistobeourorderofpreaching,andwhetherwe

shouldnotmakesomeuseofthedistinctionbetweenGod’sordinaryandHis extraordinary methods of working in the hearts and lives of men.Eighthly,Itisworthyofconsiderationwhether,forthesamereasonthatallpreparations(theprecedingworkandactsofGodinthesoulofman,for example, conviction of sin and the revelation of Christ) leading tojustificationaredenied,thefactthatfaithitselfprecedesjustificationmaybedeniedalso.Forifso,thencertainlyboth‘faith’and‘justification’willhavetobetakeninanothersensethanScriptureseemstogivethem,andlongusagehasaccordedthem.

Therefore itwouldbealsoworthourpains togive some thought to thedeterminationofthetruenatureoffaithandjustification,andalsotoaskourselves what is the nature of faith. Is faith actually and truly theinstrument of justification, or only the evidence that we are justified?DoesfaithtrulygiveusaninterestinChrist,ordoesitmerelygiveusthemanifestationthatwehavesuchaninterest?Certainotherquestionswillhelpusinthisinquiry,as,forexample,whetherthefaithwhichjustifiesaman is an act of recumbency, that is to say, a resting onChrist for thesoul’sinterest,orwhetheritisratherapersuasionandassurancethatthesoulalreadyhasaninterestinHim.CertainScriptureswhichbearonthissubjectshouldbewellweighed,chieflyRom.3.28: ‘Weconcludethataman is justified by faith without the deeds of the law’, and Rom. 5. 1:Thereforebeing justifiedby faith,wehavepeacewithGod throughourLordJesusChrist’.

Asforjustificationitself,suchconsiderationswouldshowwhetheritisanact ofGodentirely external to theperson justified, orwhether it isHisimmanentact;whetheritisanactofGodintime,orwhetherthatwhichis done in time is improperly called justification, but is merely themanifestationtoamanofwhatGodhasdoneforhimfromalleternity.Asforthosewhoareofthelatteropinion,theyshouldinquirewhether,fortheelucidationof this truth, itmightnotbeadmitted thatadistinctionshouldbedrawnbetweentheseveralstagesofjustification.Thuswemaybe said to be justified in God’s decree, in which sense we are justifiedfrometernity.Again,wearejustifiedmeritoriouslyinthedeathofChristwho laiddownatHis death the full price for the payment of our debt.Again, it may be said that we are actually justified when we come to

believe. And once more, we are justified in the court of our ownconscience,andthus justifiedtoourselves,whenwecometoassurance.And there is one further stage:We are perfectly justifiedwhenWe areglorified, that is,whenChrist shall presentHis spousewithout spot, orwrinkle,oranysuchthing,whenthechurchshallbeallfairandwithoutspot or sin. If these things are not admitted, the order observed inScripturewillseemtobeinverted,andweshallrunfromGod’srevealedwill to God’s secret will. Yea, and a man may stand actually justifiedaccording to this opinion,while he stands truly and actually under thepower,thereign,andtherageofSatanandsin.

ThesethingsIhavebroughtforwardwiththesuggestion that theyneedconsideration. It was from such considerations that I had intended toanswerthevariousobjectionstomydoctrine.ButIfindthattheydemand(as Ihavealready intimated) a separate treatise fromme,unlessbetterhandsthanmine(asIdesire)engageinthework.

For the present, I say no more than this, that those dispositions andqualifications which are prerequisites to blessing, in no way rob God’sgraceofitsfreeness,fortheyarethemselvestheresultsofHisgrace.Theyare of God’s bestowing, not of our purchasing; they are not of ourbringing,apart fromGod’s firstgiving.Wesay thatnoqualificationsonman’spartfrommanarerequired,thoughthereissomethingrequiredonman’spartfromGod.Dothosewhodenytheneedforpreparationintheheart of man for the receiving of Christ also deny the necessity of themeansofgracetothosenotyetbroughttoChrist?

Ifpreparationsinman’sheartarenotnecessary,thenthemeansofgracearenotnecessarytosuchmen.Butthemeansofgracearenecessary.Itissaidthatfaithcomesbyhearing(Rom.10.17),and,ifthemeansarenotnecessary, thenmenmaybelieveandbe justifiedbeforeever theyhaveheard of Christ. Yet I know that this consequence of the error will bedenied.

Considerthis:IfbythemeansofgraceGodpreparesthesoulforcomingtoChrist,thentakeawaytheneedforpreparationsforcomingtoChrist,andyoutakeawaythenecessityforthemeansofgrace.Butit iscertainthat,bythemeansofgrace,GodpreparesmenforcomingtoChrist.By

thesemeans of graceHe reveals tomen their state ofmisery; throughthemhecausesthemtoseetheirsinfulnessandneedofChrist.InthemHe shows howChrist and the promisesmeet their need, and kindle intheir souls a desire and thirst afterHimand earnest longings forHim.This is to them the morning of grace, the dawnings of faith andconversion,andassuchtheyaretheharbingersofChrist.

It is said of John the Baptist, whowas the ‘prodromus’ (forerunner orharbinger)ofChrist,bothofHiscomingintotheworldandalsointotheheart,thathewastomakeready,orprepare,apeoplefortheLord(Luke1.17).Howdidhedothisbutbyhisministry?Christwillhavesomeoneto go beforeHim to prepare forHis entrance. It is said of the seventydiscipleswhomChristsentouttopreach,thatHesentthem‘toeverycityandplacewhitherhehimselfwould come’.AndwhereforedidHe sendthembeforeHim,buttopreparemen’sheartsforthereceivingofChristwhentheSentOneactuallycametothem.ThisisseeninthetextwhichHegavetheseventytopreachfrom:‘Goandsayuntothem,thekingdomof God is come nigh unto you’ (Luke 10. 9). It is with Christ in Hisentranceintothesoulasitiswithaprince’scomingtoaplace.Theprincehashisharbingerswhogobeforehim,hiscourtorsuchasgowithhim,andhisattendants,orsuchasarehisfollowersandcomeafterhim.ItissowithChrist.TheharbingersofChristarethosepreparatoryworkings-conviction of sin, the hearing of Christ and the promises, the earnestlongings,thethirstingandtheseekingafterHim.Christ’scourtconsistsofallthegracesofHisSpiritwhichHeworksinHisfirstentranceintothesoul. And His attendants or followers are the peace that passes allunderstanding(Phil.4.7),andthejoywhichisunspeakableandgloriousintheHolyGhost(1Pet.1.8).ItispossibleforChristtoenterthehousebeforeHisfollowerscomein.Theremaybefaithwithoutassuranceandgracewithoutjoy.Therecanbenotruejoywithoutgrace,buttheremaybetruegracewithoutjoy.

But Iwillproceedno furtherwith this theme.Thismust suffice for thesecondbranchofthisquery.

Withreferencetoeternalrewards

Thethirdandlastqueryrunsthus:WhetherwemayobeyanddodutytoGodwithrespecttoeternalrewards.Thosewhodenythis,dosoupontwogrounds.SomesaythatChristhaspurchased,andGodhasfullyprovidedHeavenandgloryforus.Thereforewearenottohaveanyrespecttoitinourobedience.

I agree that we are not to have respect to the purchasing of eternalrewardsbyourobedience,butwemayhaverespecttothepossessionoftheminourobedience.Wemayhaverespecttotheenjoymentoftheminourobedience,thoughnottotheobtainingofthembyourobedience.Tohave an eye to our enjoyment of the rewards in our obedience is onething,andtohaveaneyetotheobtainingofitbyourobedienceisquiteanother. Certainly, those who preach obedience and holiness do notpreachthemasthecause,butastheway.Theytellusofthenecessityforthem, not in regard to the claims of justice but in respect of God’srequirementthatwemustbemademeetfortheinheritanceofthesaintsin light (Col. 1. 12). As Bernard says: ‘Good works are the way to thereward,notthecauseofthereward.’

Goodworks arenecessary, not in respect of causality, but in respect ofGod’sorderandmeansandordination. ‘Hehathcalledustovirtueandglory’,saystheapostle(2Pet1.3)-tovirtueasthepreparation,togloryas the fruition. In respect ofGod’s requirements here and now,we saythat works of righteousness and holiness must be forthcoming, forcertainly Godmakes none happy hereafter but those whomHemakesholyhere.Hebringsnone toglorybut those inwhomHeworksgrace.,He gives grace and glory’ (Ps. 84. 11). He brings heaven into the soulbeforeHebringsthesoultoheaven.

But if it be claimed that good works are to satisfy justice and to winHeaven and glory for us,we cry them down, and saywith the apostle:‘Notbyworksofrighteousnesswhichwehavedone,butaccordingtohismercyhesavedus’(Tit3.5).Letthissayingbeeverinyourears:Doallrighteousness, but learn to rest in none; be in duty in respect ofperformance,butoutofdutyandinChristinrespectofdependence.Thiswillsufficeforanswertothosewhodenydutywithrespecttorewardforthefirstofthereasonsstated.

There are other personswhodeny thatwe are to have respect to theseeternal rewards in our obedience, but it is upon another ground. Theyassert that it savoursnotof an ingenuousGospel spirit, but rather of amercenaryandservilespiritTheysaywearetoserveGodevenwerethereno heaven, no hell, no rewards, no punishments. To illustrate this, Imentiontheallegedstoryofawomanwhocarried fire inonehandandwater in theother.Anothermetherwho inquiredwhatshe intendedtodowithhertwoburdens.Sheanswered:WiththiswaterIwillquenchallthe firesofhell, andwith this fire Iwillburnupall the joysofheaven,that I may serve God neither for fear of punishment nor for hope ofreward, but purely and solely forHimself. She showed good affections,but it will appear in what I have further to say that she lacked clearperceptionsofHeavenandglory.Ifshehadconceivedofthatgloryaright,she would not have spoken after this fashion; for there is nothing inHeaven that a glorified soul needs to part with; there is nothing therewhichneedstobeburnedup;thereisnothingtherebutGodingraceandglory,asIshallexplainshortly.

Thereisanotheropinionwhichsomeexpress,whichisthatagodlymanmayperformdutiesandwalk in thewayofobediencewitha respect tothe recompense of the reward. But this opinion is so modified, sotemperedandallayed,thatitisawonderthatanyshouldtakeoffenceatit.Itsuggeststhat,thoughwemayhaverespecttoHeavenandgloryandoursalvation,yet thesemustnotbe thesupremeandprimary respects,butonlysecondaryand inferior.Also, theymustnotbeheld singlyandsolely,butconjunctivelyandjointlywithGod’sglory;notabsolutely,butsubordinatelytothatglory.

It is the saying of a former saint: ‘Not Heaven, O Lord, but God andChrist.Rather ten thousand timesChristwithoutHeaven, thanHeavenwithoutChrist.ButseeingthatThouhastjoinedthemtogether,sothatIcannotenjoyonewithouttheother, thengivemeboth,OLord;butnotChrist forHeaven, butHeaven,O Lord, for Christ.’ AndAugustine hassaid:‘HelovesTheenot,OLord,wholovessomethingbeforeThee,whichhelovesnotonaccountofThee.’

ItiscertainlytruethatHeavenandgloryarenottobeeitherthesoleorthesupremegroundsandendsofourobedience,thoughwelooktothem

toenlivenus inourwayand inourmovements.Theyarenot tobe thereason for ourmoving.We should regard them as refreshments in theway,butnotasthereasonwhyweundertakeourjourney.Theapostle’sexpression may serve to indicate this to us: ‘He had respect to therecompense of the reward’ (Heb. 11. 26). The Greek is not ‘blepo’ (tolook),but‘apoblepo’(tolookfromoroutfrom).He‘castaneye’whenhewasonhisjourney,tocheerhiminhiswayandgivehimencouragement,lestheshouldthinkofthegreatthingshehadrefusedandlestthefleshshouldbegintotellhimthathehadmadeahardbargain.Forthisreasonhestealsalookfromglory;heturnstohiscordial;hecastsaneyetotherecompenseofthereward.Bythismeansherenewshisstrengthandgetsnewandfreshencouragementtocontinuehisjourney.Hedoesnotmakethis a reason why he undertakes the journey, but only a means ofquickeninghiminhisway.Itisnotthemainspringofhismotion,buttheoiltothewheelssothathemaymovethemorecheerfully.

Some there are who distinguish between young beginners and grownChristians.At the first entranceof the soul into theways of grace, theysay,amanlooksuponheavenandhell, theonetodrivehimoutofsin,theothertopersuadeanddrawhimintothewaysofholiness.Butwhenonce a soul has truly entered upon the ways of life, he finds so muchsweetnessinGodandHisways,thatnowheservesGodwithamorefreeand ingenuous spirit. As the Samaritans said,, Now we believe, notbecauseof thy saying: forwehaveheardhimourselves, andknow thatthis is indeedtheChrist, theSaviourof theworld’(John4.41-42).Inasimilarwayitissaid,‘NowweserveThee,notforfearofpunishment,norfor hope of reward, but because we see such beauty in Thyself, suchsweetnessinThyways,thatiftherewerenootherheaven,thenthiswereheavenenough.’

Thecaseoftheprodigalseemstosupportthisargument(Luke15).Whenfirsthewasawakenedandconvincedofhissinandmisery,hesaid,‘Iwillariseandgotomyfather,andsayuntohim.Father,Ihavesinnedagainstheaven and in thy sight and am nomore worthy to be called thy son;makemeasoneofthyhiredservants.’Hedesiredtobeahiredservant.Butlater,whenhecametohisfather,andsawhismercyandindulgence,howherantomeethimandembracedhim,heceasestotalkofbeinga

hired servant. He was now overcome with love, and therefore he onlyremembersthewickednesshehasdone,andabhorshimselfforit,saying,Father,Ihavesinnedagainstheavenandbeforethee’.Hementionshiredservantsnomore.

Thus,tooitiswiththesoulofthebeliever.Whenheisfirstawakenedtosee sin, and misery by sin, he says, ‘O make me as one of thy hiredservants.’Fearofhell anddesireofheavenarehis twogreat springsofaction. Butwhen once theman comes over to Christ and the promise,when once he has tasted of God’s mercy in pardoning him and God’sgoodnessinreceivinghim,thenhefallsdownandabhorshimself,asitissaidhappenedtothoseuponwhomGodsettledthepromises(seeEzek.36. 31).Andnowall hedesires is to serveGod forHimself.He sees somuchbeautyinHim,HehastastedsomuchmercyshownbyHim,thatifhehadthestrengthofanangel,itwerealltoolittletobelaidoutforHim.Nothingthatishis-thebloodinhisveins,thelifethatsurgesthroughhislimbs,hissoul,hisspirit-istoodeartobesparedfromHisservice.Theonlyquestionnow is, not,whatwillGod giveme?but,what can I giveGod?WhatshallIrendertotheLordforallHisgoodness?Themaniswilling to go through a sea and through a wilderness, through anydifficultiesandanyduties.AllthathecandofallsinfinitelyshortofwhathisheartandgoodwillwouldrendertoGod.Allhisexpressionsfallshortofhisenlargedaffections.And thoughGodshoulddonomore forhim,yethisheartburnswithsuchaffectionforGodthathecountsallhecandoforHimbutasmallpartofthatwhichhewouldwishtodo.

Inanswerthento this thirdpartofourqueryas towhetheraChristianmanmaynotdodutywithaneyetotherecompenseofthereward,thatis, with an eye to Heaven and glory, I answer affirmatively, and inopposition to the contrary opinion, I shall state and prove the twofollowingpropositions:(1)thatwemayobeyGodwithrespecttoheavenandglory, (2) thatweought tohaverespect toheavenandglory inourobedience.Ishallendeavourtoestablishthesetwopropositions, thoughnotuponthegroundsonwhichthe lawfulnessofeyeingrewards inourobedienceisusuallybased.Ishalllabourtoestablishitonsuchspiritualand true grounds as shall show wherein I differ from the argumentsdirectedagainstitinthepreviouspartofourinquiry.

Propositioni:ThatitislawfulforChristianstoobeyGodwithrespecttoeternalrewards-heavenandglory

In looking into thisquestionI find that thosewhohavemaintained thecontrary opinion have based that opinion upon false conceptions ofheavenandglory.Theirthoughtsaboutheavenhavebeentoolowandtoocarnal by far. Probably these low thoughts have arisen from theconsiderationthattheymusthavenoeyetoheavenintheirobedience.Ihavealreadydealtwiththemeaningof‘eyeingthereward’,socanatonceproceedtoexplainwhatistrulymeantbyheavenandglory.

If we take away or separate that from Heaven which a carnal heartconceives to be heaven, then that which remains is heaven to a godlyman.Carnalmenfancyheavenundercarnalnotions.Theylookuponitasa place where there is freedom from all misery, and where there is afulnessofallpleasuresandhappiness.Butboththese-thepleasuresandthehappiness, the freedomandenjoyment - they fancy in awaywhichcomplies with the carnality of their natural hearts. This indeed is aTurkish heaven, but it is not a Christian’s heaven. Certainly we haveheavendescribedinsumptuoustermsintheScriptures(Rev.21.18-19).The walls are of jasper, the city is pure gold, the foundations aregarnished with all kinds of precious stones, the first foundation is ofjasper… and the twelve gates are twelve pearls. Thus isGod pleased topencil it out, as ifHewould temptaworldling, and even corrupt senseitselfwhichshallnevercomethere,toseektheenjoymentofit.

It must be well understood that this is spoken by way of metaphor,because the glory of heaven cannot be pencilled out as it really is.Therefore God descends to our weakness and even to sense itself, anddescribes heaven and glory by such things as are known tomen to beprecious.Not thatwe are to conceive that heaven is any such thing, orthatthereisanysuchthinginheaven.Ifamanthinksso,IshallspoilhisheavenbeforeIhavedone.

Godhasnoneedtobeindebtedtostones,evenpreciousstones,tomakeheavengloriousanymorethanthesunhasanyneedtobeindebtedtothestarstomaketheday.GodHimselffillsheavenwithgloryandmakes itinfinitelyglorious.Godinheavenisthegloryofheaven.

Forwhatpurposearesuchpoorbeggarlythingsofthesensesneededinheavenbythosewhoareallspiritandglory?Thesethingsarebelowthespiritofagodlymanwhileheisintheearth.Hehasamorenoblespiritthantosetmuchvalueonthemhere.Hecantrampleongoldandsilver,pearlsanddiamonds.Andifhisspiritisabovethesethingshere,whatarethese tohim inheaven? If these arebelowhimwhilehe isherebelow,what are they then when he gets above? These are but beggarly glorycompared with the meanest glory in heaven. Everywhere a Christianturns his eyes inHeavenwill reveal a far greater glory than these are.Everyglorifiedsoulshallbemoregloriousthanthesuninitsglory.Alas,whatarepreciousstonesbutmerepebblestonesascomparedtothegloryofaglorifiedsaint!

Iconceive, then, thatbyeternal rewards ismeantwhateverought tobetheutmostof thedesireofarenewedandsanctifiedsoul.Certainotherwriters have written about this matter excellently, so that I need notenlarge further. It is, in brief, the fruition and enjoyment of God; theenjoymentofChrist,whoisthePearlofgreatprice;theenjoymentoftheSpirit,thetrueComforter;itistheperfectionandfulnessofgrace;itisaneternalSabbath,arest,arestinJehovah,inwhomthereisallrest.Itisarest after pilgrimage. All pantings after Him here below are nowexchangedforrestsinHim.HeistheChristian’scentre,hisproperplaceofrest.Itisagloriousrest.Hererestandgloryseldommeet;inHeaventheymeetperfectly,andthatforalleternity.

DoesitnotthenseemthataChristianmaytrulydesireall this?Mayhenoteyeitall,andhaverespecttoitallinhisserviceandobedience?

May we not desire and have regard to the enjoyment of God in ourservice?Davidcouldsay,‘WhomhaveIinheavenbutthee?andthereisnoneuponearththatIdesirebesidethee’(Ps.73.25).TheenjoymentofGod was the utmost of his desire in heaven, and it is recorded as thehighestprivilegeaChristiancanenjoy throughChrist, tobebroughtbyHimtoGod(1Pet.3.18).Andmaywenottakeitintoourconsiderationherebelow?CertainlythemorerespectwehavetotheenjoymentofGodin our obedience, the more noble is our obedience. Themore we giveattentiontotheenjoymentofGodwhileweareengagedinduty,themorenobleareourspiritsinduty.Andinprayerandthedoingofduty,maywe

nothopetogetalittlecommunionwithGodandChristasweengageinthem?Withoutsuchregard,ourdutiesarenotsound.AndisitnotrighttoserveGod,andinthatservicetohaverespecttothefullenjoymentandcommunionwithHimwhich are known in heaven? To hold a contraryviewofthismatterisabsurd.

AndmaywenothaveregardtotheenjoymentofChristaswefollowafterGod and Christ in the ways of holiness ? Not indeed that we maypurchaseHimbyourobedience,butthatwemayjourneytoHiminourobedience;yea,andwalkinwaysofservicewiththehopethatthereinwemayenjoyHim;notasthemeritofourservice,butasthepurposeinourserving.

Further, may we not also desire the Spirit of God, who is the onlyComforter?AndmaywenotserveGodwithregardto theenjoymentofHimwhocomfortsandsanctifiesus?Heisnowinus,andhereafterweshall be in Him. This is the preoccupation of glory, even as it wasexperiencedbyJohnwhosaid,‘1wasintheSpiritontheLord’sday’(Rev.1.1O).

AndmaywenotobeyGodandserveHimwithrespecttoperfectionandfulnessofgraceyettocometous?IfweserveHimherewithaneyetotheadditionsofgracewhichHesendsus,maywenotobeyHimwithrespecttothefulnessofgraceyettobebestowed?Isitrightforustopraynow,towalk in theuse of ordinances and in all theways of duty, trusting thatthereby we may get a little more grace, a little more faith, more love,morebrokennessofheart?Ifso,howmuchmoremayweserveGodandobeyHimwithrespecttothefulnessandperfectionofgraceinacomingday!Thisisthatwhichwebreatheafter,andprayfor,andhopefor,evenperfection and full satisfaction. ‘When I awake’, says David, T shall besatisfiedwith thy likeness ’ (Ps. 17. 15).Andcertainly, thatwhich is thesaints’ satisfaction hereafter is the saints’ desire here. That which theybreathe after in all their service as their satisfaction,may be respectedandeyedhereasourduty inallourservice.If thosedutiesarenotwelldoneinwhichwehavenotsoughtaftercommunionwithGodandChrist,andalsothegrowthofourgrace,intheperformanceofthem,thensurelywenotonlymay,butitisourdutytoeyethesethingsandtohaverespecttotheminourserviceandobedience.

Further,maywenot live in thehopeof aperfectSabbathwhilewe aredoingduty?Whatisitbutarest?Isnotresttheendofalllabour?Doesnot labour tend torest?And isnot thisa rest,arest fromsin,arest inGod,arestwithpraiseanadmiringandglorifyingofGodtoalleternity?Andmaywenotlabourinthehopeandexpectationofreachingthisrest?Maywenotdo servicewithaneye to theobtainingof suchaSabbath?Thereshallwerestforever,andnever,neversin.Weshallrestinservice,weshallrestinGod.‘Evenforthiscausewelabourandfaintnot(2Cor.4.16).

Tellmenow,afterthislittlethathasbeensaid,whetherwemaynotserveGodwithrespecttoeternalrewards?MaynotaChristianserveGodwithrespect to these things?Nay, isheaChristianat allwhodoesnothaveregardtothesepromisedblessingsinhisservice?Why,whatissalvation,what isheaven,what isglory,butall this?Iwonderwhat forethoughtapersonhasofheavenandwhathethinksofgloryandsalvation,whenhesays thatwearenot toeye these things,nor tohave respect to them inour obedience. Certainly he thinks of them under false notions. HisthoughtsarenotGod’sthoughts.Helooksuponthemastheworlddoes,carnally, not spiritually. None will own that heaven as his happinesswhichhemaynothaverespecttoinhisservice;nay,whichhedoesnotmakehisambitionandhisaiminhisservice.Theapostleseemstoimplyasmuchasthisin2Cor.4.18:‘Welooknotatthethingswhichareseen,but at the things which are not seen’. This implies that we make thethingswhicharenotseenourambitionandaim.Andifso,thencertainlywemayhave respect to them.Letusbeashamed to imagine that tobeheavenwhichagodlymanmaynotbepermittedtoeye,andhaverespectto,inhisobedience;nay,makehisambitionandendinobeying;thatis,not somuch that heavenwhich comes to us fromGod, as that heavenwhich lies inGod. Ifwe speakofheaven in an abstractway, it is but anotion.Thiscannevermakeamanhappy.ButifwespeakofheavenastheplacewhereweshallbewithGodandfindourfullsalvationinGod,thenasheavenbecomesourhappiness soalso itbecomesourholiness.And to thiswemusthaveaneye inallourobedience. In thiswaypoorChristiansmayovercomethosedoubtswhichareusuallytheresultsofajealousmisgivingspirit.

But even so, there may be some Christians who labour under furtherdifficulties. Ah, someonewill say, I fear thatmy service is hypocriticaland out of self-love, for I aim at myself. I do service with respect toHeaven and glory. I answer thus:Wenever read thatGod chargedanybelieverwithhypocrisywhohadrespecttotheworldtocome.Indeed,Hehas charged those who have had respect to this present world, and toearthly things; as He said to the Israelites: ‘You have not fasted andprayed to me; you assembled together for corn and wine and oil’ (seeHosea 7. 14). But He never charged any soul with double-mindednesswhohadaneyeandrespecttoheavenandglory.

Isayagain,conceiveofheavenundertherightnotion;getrightthoughtsofheaven;lookuponheavenasIhavesetitforth;makethatyourHeavenwhichIhaveprovedtobeaChristian’sheaven,andthenyoumaycarryan eye and respect to it in all your obedience. Nay, the more eye andrespect you have for heaven thus described, the more spiritual andheavenlyyouwillbe.Inthisyoudonotaimatpleasingyourcorruptself,butaidingyourbestself;notyourselfinoppositiontoGod,orseparatedfromGod,butyourselfinGod.YouloseyourselfinHim,tofindyourselfinHimwhenyouareswallowedupinHislikeness.

ButsomeChristiansaretroubledbyanotherscruple.Theysay,Ifearthatmy desires are not true, for I do not desire grace for its own sake butgrace forglory,grace forheaven.Ianswerasbefore:Conceivearightofheaven.Donotlookuponitwithacarnaleye,asaplaceoffreedomfromthemiseries you feel andas aplaceof enjoymentof thehappiness andpleasuresyouhope for.But lookupon itasaplacewhereyouwillhavecommunion with God, enjoyment of Christ, perfection and fulness ofgrace,freedomfromallsinandcorruptionandspiritualimperfection.Dothis, and youdonot sin in desiring grace for heaven. If you lookupongraceandheavenas twodifferent things, youmayerr indesiringgraceforheaven.Butifyoulookuponheavenasthefulnessofgrace,thenyoumaydesiregraceforheaven.Youmaydesiregracehereasthebeginningofheaven, as the earnest of glory, and as thatwhichwill entitle you toperfectionandfulnessofgloryhereafter.

Inbrief,then,hewhodesiresgracemerelyforglory,andlooksuponthatglory as a thing quite different from grace, has desires which are not

right. But youmay desire grace with respect to heaven so long as youdesireheavenwithrespect tograce.Themoreenlargedyouare insuchdesires,themoregraciousandspiritualareyourprinciples.Thepositionhasbeenwellsummedupbyoneauthor inthewords: ‘Sanctification isgloryinthebud;gloryissanctificationintheflower.’

Proposition2:Christiansnotonlymayhavebutoughttohaverespecttoheavenandgloryintheirobedience.

IcomenexttoshowthatChristiansnotonlymayhave,butoughttohave,respect to heaven and glory in their obedience. It is not only ‘may’ but‘must’.YoumayobeyGodwithrespecttoheaven,butyoumustrespectheaven in your obedience. It is that which God has urged upon us tofortifyourheartsagainstthefearofearth’stroubles,andtobearupourhearts under the sense of any calamities. It is to be noticed that whenChrist desired to armHis disciples against all the fears and evils theymightencounterinthislife,HedrawstheencouragementfromthetruththatGodintendstogivethemakingdom: ‘Fearnot, little flock, for it isyourFather’sgoodpleasure togiveyou thekingdom’ (Luke12.32).Hebringstheharbourintothesea,therestintothelabour,thegloryintothetrouble;andthisencouragesasoultogothroughall.Ifwedonotpayanyrespecttothissourceofencouragement,weslighttheLord’sownword.AsitisasintoslighttheconsolationsofGod(Job15.11),soitisnolessasin tomake light of the encouragements ofGod.God gives us these inordertohelpfaithagainstsense,tofurnishfaithwithargumentsagainstthe carnal reasonings of the flesh, and to strengthen us in the greateststraitsanddistressestheworldcanbringuponus.

Thesaintshavebeenhelpedthusintheirfiercestbattles.Wehavealreadyseen howMoseswas thus helped to suffer afflictionwith the people ofGod.Didhenot lookfor therecompenseof thereward?Thatgloryandhappiness to come, which was made real and visible to him in thispresent world, encouraged him to slight all the greatness of Egypt. Itrenderedalltreasuresofearthtoolittleforhisspirit,andhisspirittoobigtobedauntedbytheworld’sdiscouragements.

ItwasthesamewiththeapostlePaul.Hewastroubledoneveryside,buthe laboured andhe did not faint:wherefore?Because (as he said) ‘our

light affliction which is but for a moment worketh for us a far moreexceeding and eternalweight of glory, whilewe look, not at the thingswhichareseen,butatthethingswhicharenotseen’(2Cor.4.17-18).Wethusseewhere theapostleobtainedhis strength and encouragement togothroughallhistroublesanddistresses.Helookedabovethosethingswhichareseen,andconsideredthosethingswhicharenotseen.

To be brief: would you walk thankfully and cheerfully? Would you bestrong to do and to suffer?Would you submit to all God’s disposings?Wouldyourejoice inyoursufferings?Ifyouwoulddo these things,youmusthaveaneyefortherecompenseofthereward.Iwillspeakbrieflyofeachinturn.

Would you walk thankfully? The right consideration of thematter willmakeusburstout intopraises inour lowest conditions.Here ismatterenoughforpraises.Heartheapostleasheburstsintopraise:‘Blessedbethe God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to hisabundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope… to aninheritance incorruptible, and undefined and that fadeth not away,reserved in heaven for you’ (1 Peter 1. 3). Indeed such thoughts andconsiderations will fill us full of heaven and glory, andmake us breakforthintosongsofthanksgivingforHisgreatgoodness:,Whohathmadeusmeet tobepartakersof the inheritanceof the saints in light’ (Col. 1.12).

Wouldyouwalkcheerfully?Wouldyoubefilledwithjoyandcomfortinthemidstofallyoursadconditions?Wouldyoujoyintribulations?Thenconsider the things of theHeaven towhich you aremoving:They tookjoyfullythespoilingoftheirgoods,knowinginthemselvesthattheyhadin heaven a better and an enduring substance’ (Heb. 10. 34). 11 isreportedofCaesar,thatwhenhewassad,heusedtosaytohimself.Thinkthat thou art Caesar.’ If Caesar thought that his earthly greatness wasenoughtobearuphisheart inany trouble,howmuchmoreshould theconsideration of the great things reserved for us cheer our hearts andcomfortourspirits,nomatterhowsadourcondition!Hethatlivesmuchin the thoughts of heaven, livesmuch the life of heaven, that is to say,thankfullyandcheerfully.

The philosophers say that if men lived above the second region of theatmospheretheywould liveaboveallstorms, forthere isnothingfoundtherebutserenityandclearness.Itistrueofthosesoulswhocanliveinheaven that they have rest in labour, calm amid storms, tranquillity intempests,andcomfortsamidsttheirgreatestdistresses.

WouldyoubestrongtodothewillofGod?Thesameconsiderationswillgive you strength and encouragement. The apostle brings in this as anencouragement:,Whatsoeveryedo,do itheartily…knowing thatof theLord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance’ (Col. 3. 23-24).Likewise,in1Cor.15.58:‘BealwaysaboundingintheworkoftheLord,forasmuchas yeknow that your labour isnot in vain in theLord.’Youmayreadsimilarthoughtsin2Pet.I.10-11and3.14.

Do youwish to be able to suffer and yet rejoice?The considerations ofheavenandglorywillsoencourageyouthatyouwillbeenabledtomeetalltrials.WeseethisinMoses,asIhavealreadyexplained.Weseeitintheearlybelievers,aswereadinHebrews,chapter11.TowhichImightaddmanymore.Itisthemanwhoeyesheavenandglorywhoisabletowalksafelyinallplaces.WhilePeterkepthiseyeuponChrist,hewalkedsafelyuponastormyandtempestuoussea,butwhenhetookhiseyeoffChristandlookeduponthestorminessofthesea,thenhebegantosink.While we have an eye upon eternals, we are able to walk on themosttempestuoussea,andtogothroughanystormsandtroubles;butifonceWe take our eye off Christ andHeaven, then the least trouble ismorethan we can bear. It was said by Basil: I care for nothing, visible orinvisible, if Imay but get Christ. Let fire, let the cross, let breaking ofbonescome,nay,letthetormentsofthedevilcomeuponme,ifonlyIcangetChrist.’SuchablessedenlargementofheartdidtheconsiderationofChristandheavenputintohim,thathewasabletoslightandcondemnalltheevilsoftheworld.Thismuchiscertain,thathewhoconsiderstheeternalweightofglorywillnot think the lightafflictions,whicharebutforamoment,worthytobecomparedtoit.HethatseesvisionsofglorywillbelikeStephen,whowasabletoendureashowerofstones.Hethatconsiders eternity as the goal towhichhemoves, doesnot dread to gothroughallthetroublesoftheway.SaysSeneca, ‘Hewhokeepseternityinminddoesnotshrinkfromthearduousnessoftheway.’

Would you submit to all God’s disposings of your affairs? Theconsiderationsofheavenandglorywillmakethebelieversubmittoanythinghere.Hecanbecontenttobepoor,forheknowsheshallberich;tobereproached,forheknowsheshallbehonoured;tobeafflicted,forheknowsheshallbecomforted;tobeimprisoned,forheknowsheshallbebroughtintoalargeplace;tositatDives’door,forheknowsheshallrestinAbraham’sbosom;toloseall,forheknowsheshallfindallhereafter.Godwillbeall,andmorethanall, tohim.Heknows that the trials lastbut for a little season, a day, an hour, a moment, a small moment.Hereafterthereareeternalembraces.HecansubmittoGodtoworkHisownwork,andtoworkitinHisownway,andafterHisownmanner,ifsobe He will bring him to glory at last. And he can say, Welcome thatsorrowthatpresagesjoy,thattroublethatendsincomfort,thosecrossesthatprepare for crownings, and thatdeathwhichushers in eternal life.And all this he can do by the consideration of the great and gloriousthings which God has reserved for him.Hence we see the necessity ofhavingrespecttoheavenandgloryinourobedience.

8.ObediencetoMen

Query6:AreChristiansfreedfromobediencetomen?

TwoKindsofSubjection

BeforeIanswerthisquery,ImustsaythatsomeplacesinScriptureseemtosaythatitdoesnotstandwithChristianlibertytobeobedienttomen.We find in Scripture (as I showed at the beginning of this treatise) adouble charge: i. Thatmanmust not usurp themastership. 2. That hemustnotundergoservitude.Thusweread inMatt.23.9-10: 'BenotyecalledRabbi,foroneisyourMaster,evenChrist,andallyearebrethren.Andcallnomanyourfatherupontheearth;foroneisyourFather,whichisinheaven.'Aquinascommentsonthisverse:'Itisforbiddentomentoaddress rulers as attributing to them a supremacy of rulewhich entersinto rivalrywith the ruleofGod.'We readagain in 1Cor. 7.23:Yeareboughtwithaprice;beyenottheservantsofmen',whichindicatesthatwearenottoundergoservitude.

On the other hand, and seemingly in contradiction to this, we read inRom.13.1:'Leteverysoulbesubjecttothehigherpowers.ForthereisnopowerbutofGod;thepowersthatbeareordainedofGod.'Andagainin1Pet.2.13-15:'SubmityourselvestoeveryordinanceofmanfortheLord'ssake,whetheritbetothekingassupreme;oruntogovernors....Asfreeandnotusingyourlibertyforacloakofmaliciousness,butastheservantsofGod.'

NowhowshallwereconcilethesetwokindsofScriptures?Onesays,'Beyenot the servantsofmen'; theother says, 'Submit yourselves to everyordinanceofmanfor theLord'ssake'.But themeaning is thatwemustsubmit ourselves to the authority ofman in such away thatwedonottherebydenyourChristianlibertywhichwehaveinChrist.AndwemustmaintainourChristianlibertyinsuchawaythatwedonot,asifmakingan excuseof our liberty,neglect our Christian duty. Submit yourselves,says theapostle,butas free,notas slaves.As freemen, still submit.HeteachesnosubmissionwhichwouldcontradictChristianfreedom.

Inbrief,then,thereisatwofoldsubjectiontoman:i.Thereisasubjectionwhichmay be yieldedwith the preservation of our Christian liberty; 2.Thereisasubjectionwhichcannotbeyieldedwithoutadenialofit.Thefirst of these is implied in the verses just quoted from Romans and iPeter,thesecondintheversesfromMatthewandiCorinthians.Theonepertainstothesubjectionoftheoutwardmaninthingslawful;theotherpertains to the subjection of the inwardman, the soul and conscience,andinthingsunlawful.Theoneisasubordinatesubjection,asubjectioninsubordinationtoGod,andso 'for theLord'ssake',asPetersays.Theotherisanabsolutesubjection,asubjectionofoursoulsandconsciences,forman's sake.Toman's authoritywemaybe subject in respect of theoutwardmaninthingslawful.Butforoursoulsandconsciences,wehavenofathersandmasters,butonlyourFatherandMasterinheaven.

We seebothof thesepositionsplainly ifwe compareMatt. 23. 10withEph.5.7.Theonereads:'Benotyecalledmasters,foroneisyourMaster,even Christ; and the other: 'Servants, be obedient to your mastersaccording to the flesh'. The distinction is here made between mastersaccording to the flesh andmasters according to the spirit. The formerappertaintotheoutwardmaninoutwardthings.Butonearthwehavenomastersaccordingtothespirit,nonetowhomwearetosubjectoursoulsandconsciences,butonlyChrist.As,inthissense,Wehavenofather,sowehavenomasteruponearth.

ObediencetotheCivilMagistrate

Butitmaybeobjected:Isitnotlawfulforamagistratetoimposeactionsuponmenwhichconcerntheirconsciences?Ianswer:ItisnotlawfulforamagistratetoimposeanythinguponaChristianwhichitwouldnotbelawful intheeyesofGodforhimtoobey;thatis,tosetupanauthorityagainst Christ's authority, the power ofman against the power ofGod.Butamagistratemayrequirethosethingsatourhandswhichareclearlyrevealed tobe thewill ofGod. In thisweobeyGod inman,andnot somuchmanasGod.InthiscasewemaysayastheSamaritanssaid:'Nowwebelieve, not because of thy sayings, but becausewehave heardhimourselves.'

I conceive theremay be a distinction drawn between suprememastersand subordinatemasters; andbetween subjection rendered to amasterwhoishimselfsubjecttoanother,andobediencerenderedtoonewhoissupremeandabsolute.Thosearesubordinatemasterswhomweobeyinorder that we may obey a higher authority; and those are suprememastersinwhomobediencerestsandinwhomitisfinallyresolved.TheRomish doctrine requires absolute submission to the authority of theChurch, an authoritywhichneithermennor angelsmay usurpwithouthigh treason to Jesus Christ. Says Bellarmine: you are ignorant andunskilled;thereforeifyouwishtobesaved,thereisnoothercourseopentoyoubuttorenderablindobediencetoourauthority.'Werepeatthatitistreasonforanytousurpthisauthorityandwickednessforanytoyieldtoit.IfGodwillnotallowasuprememaster,neitherabsoluteobedience,in temporal things, but requires us to serve men in subordination toChrist(Eph.6.7andCol.3.23-24),muchlesswillHeallowofasuprememasterinspiritualthings.Certainlyitisthehighestpieceofslaveryandvassalageintheworldtoyieldupourconsciencestothewillofanyman,orsurrenderour judgments tobewhollydisposedbythesentencesanddeterminationsofothers.ButintheothersenseIconceivethatmenmaybemasters,andthatwemaybesubjecttotheminsubordinationtoGodandChrist.

Ifwe look into theOld Testamentwe find that it plainly sets forth thesubordinate character of obedience in things spiritual.ThepeoplewereboundtoobeythemagistrateswhentheycommandedobediencetothatwhichGodhadcommanded,andtoobeythem,notastheyweretypesofChrist,butastheyweretemporalmagistratesandweresettodefendtheworship of God. Some have imagined that the power of magistrates,leading up to Christ, was to cease when Christ came, who is the greatKingofHisChurch,andinwhomaloneallauthorityoverHispeoplewastobeconfined,butIdonotconceive itso. Iconceive thatamagistrate,withoutanytrespassingontheauthorityofChrist,orinfringementoftheliberty of conscience of the Christian, may require those things to beobeyedwhichareclearlyrevealedtobethewillandmindofChrist.Yetinthis he is but a subordinate, and Christ is the supreme Master. ThemagistratetellsuswhatisGod'swill,notwhatishiswill.Hetellsusitishiswill,too,butonlybecauseitisGod'swillfirst.

Butitmaybeobjectedagainthat,thoughamagistratemaycommandorimposethingswhichareclearlyevidenttobethemindofChrist,yetitispossible forhimtoseekto imposethingsofmoredoubtfulobligation. Ianswer that it should be inquired whether the things imposed aredoubtfulinthemselves,oronlydoubtfultome.Ifindeedtheybedoubtfulinthemselves,Ihumblyconceive,eitherthattheyshouldnotbeimposedatall,orelseimposedwithalltenderness.Butiftheybeonlydoubtfultome,theymayyetbelawfullyimposed,thoughasyetnotlawfullyobeyedbyme.

Mymeaningisthis:Assomethingsmaybelawfullyobeyed,whichmaynotbelawfullyimposed,sotherearesomethingswhichmaybelawfullyimposed,andyetnotlawfullyobeyed.Hezekiah'scommandtobreakthebrazen serpentwhenhe foundmen idolizing it,was a lawfulcommandwhichmightbe lawfully imposed; andyet, if therehadbeen somewhohadreverentialthoughtsofit,asathingwhichhadbeensetupbyGod,whichhadbeenfamousinthewilderness,andmoreoverwhichwasatypeof Christ, and who therefore doubted whether it was right to obey theking'scommand,Isay,inthiscaseitcouldnothavebeenlawfullyobeyedbysuch,eventhoughthedestructionof thebrazenserpentwas lawfullycommandedbyHezekiah.

Certainly, there aremany thingswhichmay be commanded; and if wehave respect merely to the things commanded, they may be lawfullyobeyed;but ifwehaverespect to thepersonwho is required toobey, itmaybeunlawfultohimtoobey.Inthiscaseamanmaybothsinindoing,forhehasanevilconscienceinthematter,andhemaysininnotdoing,forheisguiltyofdisobedience.

Wemightbecomeinvolvedinagreatdisputeonthissubject,whichitisnot my intention to do at this time. It may be possible in some otherdiscourse to treat more largely upon it, and to endeavour to give asatisfactoryanswertothemultitudeofscruplesandobjections inwhichthis subject, almostmore than any other, abounds. But as I have nowanswered the main queries which have been raised and which are incontroversy concerning Christian freedom, I shall conclude the wholewithabriefapplication.

9.TheApplicationtoBelieversandUnbelievers

IfitisthecasethatChristhaspurchasedfreedomforbelieversonly,andbroughtbelieversandthemonly intothepossessionofsuchaprivilege,thenwhatmust be the fearful condition of unbelievers. You are still inbondage to sin and Satan and the law of God, and who can express amoremiserableconditionthanthis.

TheMiserableBondageoftheUnbeliever

(i)Bondagetosin

Youareinbondagetosin,notonlyinbondagebyreasonofsin,nay,butdeliveredup toall evils, spiritual, temporal, andeternal.Youareunderthecommandofeverylust.Everysinisatyrantinthesoul.Christtellsusthatwhosoevercommitssinistheservantofsin(John8.34).Firstamanentertainssinashisfriend,andafterwardsitbecomeshismaster.Youaretheservantsof sin (Rom.6.20).Youare soldunder sin, as theapostleexplainsinreferencetohisownnaturalcondition(Rom.7.14).Hesays,Iam carnal, sold under sin'. Indeed, we are all of us sold under sin bynature,butherewesellourselvestosin.As itwassaidofAhab,thathe'soldhimselftoworkwickedness',soitmaybesaidofus.Wearenotonlypassivelycontenttobevassalsofsin,butweactivelyendeavourtobringourselvesintovassalage.Weareactively

willingtobesin'sslavesratherthantobeGod'sservants.ItissetdowninScripture as the character of aman in his natural condition, that he isdisobedient,servingdiverslustsandpleasures(Titus3.3).Hisobediencetosinisnotforced,butfree,notinvoluntarybutnaturalandwithdelight.Hence it is said that sin reigns in natural men. Sin exercises asovereignty,notatyranny,inthem.Theyaretheprofessedservantstosin(2 Pet. 2. 19), like thosemenwho chose theirmasters after the Lord'sjubilee was proclaimed and whose ears were bored in token of theirwillingnesstobeinperpetualsubjection.

Suchisyourstate.Youareinbondagetosin,anditisafearfulbondageindeed.It issoulslavery.TheconditionoftheIsraelitesunderPharaoh,andof thosewhoarenowprisoners inTurkishgalleys, is very sad,butthatisbutthebondageofthebody.Butthisisasoulslavery,bondageofthe soul. What is it to have our bodies in vassalage and our estatesenslavedincomparisonwiththebondageofthesoul?Bettertobeunderthe tyranny of themost imperiousman, than under the vassalage andslaveryofsinandourowncorruptions.Thisistheultimate,thefinishingstrokeofGod,whenHegivesupamantothedominionofhissins. 'Hethatisfilthy,lethimbefilthystill'istheworstofalljudgments.

Andagain,itisasenselessslavery,thatis,aslaverywearenotconsciousof. We say in natural things that those diseases are most mortal thatdepriveusofsense.Andsuchistheslaveryofsin.Weareinchainsandfeelitnot;weareundertheweightofsinandarenotconsciousofit.Godoftenbringsmenintobondagebysin,clappingthemunderthefearsandterrorsofanaccusingconscience,andallthisthatHemightdeliverthemfromsin'sbondage.Wesay thataburning fever ismorehopeful thanastateoflethargy.Aphysiciansometimesbringshispatientintoastateoffever to cure lethargy. Just so, a wounded and troubled conscience isbetterthanasecureanddeadconscience.Whenthestrongmankeepsthehouse,all isatpeace.Such is themiseryof thisbondage, thataman isunconsciousofthebondage.

Further,itisanactiveslavery.Amanheldbyhislustswilldrudgeortakeany pains to satisfy them. He will spend his strength, his health, hisestate, and endure pain, to satisfy his lusts, though such aman thinksanythingtoomuchthatislaidoutforGodandChrist.Butnothingistoomuchtospendonhislusts.Thusisitanactiveslavery.

It is also a willing slavery. The man counts his slavery freedom, hisbondage liberty,hischainsofbrasstobechainsofpearl.Theman isofhis own will a servant to sin. How often has the Lord's jubilee beensoundedinhishearing!HowoftenhasChristbeentenderedtohimtosethim free! Yet he chooses to return to his old master. It is therefore arighteousthingwithGodthatheshouldboretheman'searsintokenofeternalslaverytosinandSatan.

Andagain, it is abondage fromwhichamancannotbyhisownpowerdeliver himself.He cannot redeemhimself by price, nor can he deliverhimselfbypowerorbyconquest.Amanmaybeinbondagetomenandyetabletoransomhimself,ifnotfromhisownresources,yetbythehelpsandcollectionsandcontributionsofothers.Butnomancanredeemhisownsoul.Nay,allthecontributionsofmenandangelsfalltooshort.Theyhavebutoiltokeeptheirownlampsalight(Matt.25.9).ItissetdownasnotonlytheproperworkofChrist,butasthegreatestworkwhichChristhasdone,toredeemHispeoplefromsin.IndeedHediditbyprice(Gal.4. 5).HeboughtHis people back, but itwas not by silver and gold, asPetertellsus;theredemptionoftheirsoulsismoreprecious(Ps.49.7-8),anditwasbythebloodofChrist.

NorcanthepeopleofGodredeemthemselvesbypower.Tobeasinnerand tobewithout strengthareoneand the same thing, in theapostle'sphrase(Rom.5.6-8).Andthereforehe tellsus:,Whileweweresinnersandwithoutstrength,Christdiedforus.'Indeedwecoulddonothingtohelpourselvesoutofthisbondage.Wewerenotabletoweep,topray,toworkourselvesoutofthiscondition.Itiswithusaswithmencaughtinquicksands;themoretheystrive,thedeepertheysinkintothem.Sothemorewestriveinourownstrengthandbyourownpower,themorewebecomeentangled,andthestrongerthechainbecomeswhichbindsustothis condition. Thus you may get a glimpse into the nature of thismiserablestate.Butthisisnotall.

(ii)BondagetoSatan

YouareinbondagetoSatan,notthatyouowedhimanything-youwereonly indebted to God's justice - but he is God's jailer, who holds poorsoulsdownasunderbrazenbarsandbehindirongatesnottobebroken.Ifaman is inbondage it issomerelief tohimtohaveamerciful jailer.But thisadds to themiseryof thesinner, thathehasacruel jailer.ThejailerofhellislikeNebuchadnezzarwhowilltakenorewards;hewillnotbebribed;he cannotbepersuaded to set the soul free. Satan is a crueltyrantwhorulesintheheartsofthechildrenofdisobedience(Eph.2.2).Thesinner is takencaptiveathiswill, as theapostle tellsus (2Tim.2.26).

Yet some are more royal slaves than others. Some he keeps in closecustody.Heholdsthemdownwithmanyweightsandchains,undertheragingpowerofmanylustsandcorruptions.Othershekeepsinaneasiercustody,andallowsthemtobeprisonersatlarge.Hesuffersthemtowalkabout.Theyhavethelibertyoftheprison.Butyettheyareimprisonedathis pleasure and taken captive at his will. He may permit them to domanythings-Herodtohear,Judastopreach-yetheholdsthembytheirlusts,andcanbringthemtoheelwhenhepleases.

Such then isyourbondage toSatan. It isa cruel,mercilessbondage, towhichthebondageofIsraelunderPharaohisnotworthytobecompared.Itisauniversalbondage,universalinrespectofpersons,forallmenarebornslaves,anduniversal inrespectofparts, forallpartsofamanareinvolvedinit.Nopartisfree.Thejudgment,thewill,theaffections,themind, and the conscience are all in chains, all enslaved to Satan. It isuniversalalso inrespectofactsandperformances.Asinner inbondagecannot perform one act as a free man. He is required to perform theactionsofafreeman,suchactionsasfreemendo;buthecannotperformthemasafreeman.Hepraysasaslave,notasason.Heweepsasaslave,notasafreeman.Heactsmorefromfearofthelash,thanforhatredofsinandloveofGod.Allhisactsareactsinbondage.Hisveryspiritisinbondage. He has no spirit of freedom. And in this sad condition heremainsuntilChristsetshimfree.

(iii)BondagetothelawofGod

Furthermore,suchamanis inbondagetothe lawofGod,that is, to itscurse and its rigour. The penalties and forfeitures of the law attach tohim,astheapostlestatesinGal.3.10:'Asmanyasareoftheworksofthelawareunderthecurse'.Andwhyso? 'For it iswritten,Cursediseveryonethatdoesnotcontinueinallthingswhicharewritteninthebookofthelawtodothem.'Andthatisimpossibletohim.Thereforeofnecessityheisunderthecurse.

Iwilltakethecursetopieces,asitwere,andshowwhatlieswithinit.Itisa comprehensive curse, a universal curse. Aman under it is cursed ineverycondition,inhisgoldandsilver,andinhisrelations,yea,inhisvery

mercies.Whereothersareblessedintheirafflictions,heiscursedinhismercies.Asthereisablessinghidintheworstofthingstothegodly, intheircrossesandlossesandindeathitself,sothereisacurseinthebestof things for thewickedman, inhiswealth, inhis comforts, and inhisenjoyments.Itisanextensivecurse.

It isalsoanunavoidablecurse.Man isbornheir to itas surelyashe isbornasonofAdam.Itisanunsupportablecurse,whichneithermennorangels are able to bear. The angels who have fallen lie under it, andcannot help themselves. The wrath of man may be borne, or at leastundergone.It isawraththatreachestothebody.ButwhocanbearthewrathofGod?This isawraththatreachesto thesoul,andwhoknows,muchlesswhocanbear,thepowerofHiswrath?

It is anunremovable curse, so far aswe look to anythingwe can do ofourselvestoremoveit.IfGodlaysitonaman,notallthepowerandwitofmenandangelscantakeitoff.AsnonecanpluckbelieversoutofthehandsofGod'smercy,sononecanpluckunbelieversoutofthehandsofHisjustice.Thusyouareinbondagetothecurseofthelaw.

Then, too, youare inbondage to the rigourof the law. It is rigorous inthat it requires hard things, difficult things. If you look over the dutiescommanded,youwillfindthemso.Indeed,youwillfindthemimpossiblethings,asrelatedtothestateinwhichyoufindyourself.Itisayokewhichneitherour fathersnorwewereable tobear (Acts 15. 10).Wemightaswellbesettomovemountains,tostopthesunfromrunninghiscourse,tofetchyonderstarfromheaven,astodowhatthelawcommands.Andyetallthisitrequirestobedonebyusintheexactnessandaccordingtothe exactness of the command. It requires perfect obedience, both inrespectof theprinciple, in respectof themanner, and in respectof theend,anditwillabatenothing.Andallthisitrequiresinourownpersons.Itwillnotadmitofobediencebyasurety.Performanceonourbehalfbyasubstitute isGospel, not law. The law requires all to be done,with theutmostexactness,inourownperson(Gal.3.10).

Nor will the law accept of themost earnest endeavours if there is anyfailureanywhereintheperformance.Itwillnotallowofdesiresinsteadofdeeds,orofendeavoursinsteadofperformance.Desiresandendeavours

belongnottothelawbuttotheGospel.Andthelawrequiresconstancyinitsfulfilment;itrequiresobediencefromthewholemanofthewholelawforthewholeof life.Ifyouobey forneversomanyyearsandyet fail inonetittleatthelast,evenifonlyinathoughtorsomeinclinationofthemind,alltheobediencecountsfornothing.Forthelawsays:'Cursedishethatdoesnotcontinuetoobeyineverything'.

Notwithstandingallthisexactionfromaman,yetthelawwillnotaffordhimanystrengthorsufferhimtogethelpfromanother.Hemustbearhisburden alone. The law lays loads on him; it imposes duty withoutconsideringhis strength;norwill the lawaffordhim strength. It bids aman look for that where he can. It requires performance in strengthwithoutgivingamanstrengthtoperform.

This,too,showstherigourofthelaw,thatupontheleastfailing,allthehopes youmay have had of getting good by the law are gone. You arerenderedhelplessandincapableofeverexpectinggoodfromthelaw.Youareundoneforever.UponAdam'sfirstsin,allhishopesoflifebythelawended,andifGodhadnotintroducedaSaviourhewouldhavebeenlostforever.Butsomeonemaysay:Mighthenothavebeenabletodotwiceasmuchgoodashehaddoneevil, andsomadeamends forhis formerfault?Notatall, forwhenonceamanhasoffended, ifonly in the leastparticular,hecannevermakeamendsforit.Hecanneveroutdothelaw.Ifhecouldoutdowhatthelawrequired,yetallhecoulddowouldnevermakeamends,ormakeupfortheformerfault.Ifyouweretogoabouttoredeemeveryidlewordbyanageofprayers,everyactofinjusticewithatreasuryofalms,everyomissionofdutybymillionsofduties,yetallthiswould be too little. It could not possibly make amends for the formerfailing.

Butyouwillsay,Why?Whatthen?Willnot the lawacceptofmy tears,myrepentanceformyfault?No!Hereisthefurtherrigourofthelaw,thatifeveryouhaveoffendedthoughinthe leastparticular, itwillacceptofnoattemptatamendment.Itadmitsofnoplaceofrepentance.Itwillnotadmitoftears.RepentanceisbroughtinundertheGospel,notunderthelaw. If you fail inone small thing, and shed seasof tears, even tearsofblood; ifyouweepyoureyesoutofyourhead,yetall this isunavailing,forthelawadmitsofnorepentance.

Thus it is seenhowmiserable a thing it is tobeunder sin's bondage. Ihave enlarged on thematter so as to commend the great privilege of aChristian's freedom by contrast with it. It is commonly said thatcontrariesillustrateoneanother,andcertainlythesightofthemiseryofbondageenablestheChristiantoconceivethebetteroftheblessednessofthe freedom which comes through Christ. And this freedom I haveexplained at length in the earlier part ofmy discourse, showing how itincludesfreedomfromsin,Satan,andfromthelaw.

TheDutyoftheBeliever

(i)TomaintainChristianliberty

Butyetagain: It is theworkof thosewhomChristhasbrought intotheenjoymentofthishighandgloriousprivilegetomaintainit:'StandfastinthelibertywherewithChristhathmadeusfree'(Gal.5.1).Therearetwochief things which Christ has entrusted to us, and we are to preservetheminviolate.ThefirstisChristianfaith:'Seethatyeearnestlycontendfor the faith which was once delivered unto the saints'(Jude 3). Thesecond is Christian liberty: 'Stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christhathmadeus free'.Everyman shouldbe faithful in those thingswhichare entrusted to him, and God has entrusted the Christian man withprecious things.Christian faith andChristian liberty are alike precious,andhowcarefulweshouldbetomaintainthem!Civillibertiesandlibertyto gowherewewill are very precious.Howmuchwe engage ourselvesjust now in defence of our liberties and freedoms against those whowoulddepriveusofthem!Andindeedtheymayjustlybeesteemedmenofabjectmindswhowould on any account at all forego their freedomsandliberties.

LeotheEmperordrewupasevereconstitution, inwhichhe forbadeallmen thebuying, and allmen the selling, of their freedom,esteeming itmadnessinanymantopartwithhisfreedom.Andifcivilfreedomissopreciousand is tobemaintained,howmuchmore is spiritual freedom,the freedom wherewith Christ makes a man free! A freedom dearlypurchasedbythebloodofChrist!Weesteemourcivilfreedomthebetter

as we remember that it cost somuch of the blood of our ancestors toobtainit.Itwouldbebasenessinustobecarelessofthatwhichcostthemtheirblood.HowmuchmorethenshouldweesteemourfreedomwhichwaspurchasedbythepreciousbloodofChrist!Youareredeemed,notbysilverandgold,butbythebloodofChrist,saystheapostle.Ourfreedomisdearlybought,mercifullyrevealed,freelybestowed,andfullyconveyedtousbytheSpiritofChrist.Wehavemanyandgreat reasons thereforeformaintainingit,andforkeepingourselvesclearoftheyokeofbondage.

MaintainyourlibertyinChristbyrefusingtolockanymoretothelawforjustification,andbyrefusingtofearitswordsofcondemnation.Youaretolive,inrespectofyourpracticeandobedience,asmenwhocanneitherbe condemned by the lawnor justified by it. It is a hard lesson to liveabovethelaw,andyettowalkaccordingtothelaw.ButthisisthelessonaChristianhastolearn,towalkinthelawinrespectofduty,buttoliveabove it inrespectof comfort,neither expecting favour from the law inrespect of his obedience nor fearing harsh treatment from the law inrespectofhisfailings.Letthelawcomeintoremindyouofsinifyoufallintosin,butyouarenot tosuffer it toarrestyouanddragyou into thecourtto be tried and judged for your sins.Thiswouldbe tomake voidChristandgrace.IndeedChristianstoomuchliveasthoughtheyweretoexpectlifebyworks,andnotbygrace.Wearetoobiginourselveswhenwedowell,andtoolittleinChristinourfailings.Othatwecouldlearntobe nothing in ourselves in our strength, and to be all in Christ in ourweakness! In a word, let us learn to walk in the law as a rule ofsanctification,andyettoliveuponChristandthepromisesinrespectofjustification.

The law is a yoke of bondage, as Jerome calls it. They who look forrighteousnessfromitarelikeoxenintheyoke,whichdrawandtoil,andwhentheyhaveperformedtheirlabour,theyarefattedfortheslaughter.Likewise, when men have endeavoured hard after their ownrighteousness, theyperish at last in their just condemnation.As I havepreviously said, Luther calls them the devil'smartyrs. They takemuchpainstogotohell.TheybeingignorantofGod'srighteousness,andgoingabout to establish their own righteousness, have not submittedthemselvestotherighteousnessofGod'(Rom.10.3).Proudnaturewould

fain do something for the purchase of glory. God will have it to be ofgrace,andmanwouldhaveitofdebt.Godwillhaveittobeofgift,andmanwouldhave itofpurchase.Wehave toomuchof thisnature inus.Wegotoprayerandlookuponourdutiesandourtearsassomuchgoodmoneylaidoutforthepurchaseofeternalblessings.Nay,evenifwedonot bring money, yet we would plead our own qualifications anddispositions as if they were our deservings. This utterly crosses withGod'sdesigns.Hewillhavealltobeofgrace.Manwouldhavealltobeofdebt.God'swordisnotnow,'Dothisandlive',but'Believeandthoushaltbesaved'.Walkinthedutiesofthelaw,butwithaGospelspirit.Thelawistobeacknowledgedasaruleofsanctification,butitistoberejectedinrespectofjustification.ItwaswellsaidbyLuther:'Walkintheheavenofthe promise, but in the earth of the law', that is, in the heaven of thepromise,inrespectofbelieving,andintheearthofthelawinrespectofobeying.InthiswaytheChristiangivesthelawitshonourandChristHisglory.

MaintainyourChristian libertyagainstmen,aswell asagainst the law.That liberty isaprecious jewelandwemustsuffernonetorobusof it.Let us never surrender our judgments or our consciences to be at thedisposalandopinionsofothers,andtobesubjectedtothesentencesanddeterminationsofmen.Wemustallowneitherpowernorpolicy,neitherforcenorfraud,torobusofit.

Theapostlesays,'Standfastandbenotentangled'.Letusnotreturnlikewillingslavesintoourformerchains.Ambrosehassaidthatitisagreaterevil for a freeman to bemade a slave than for a man to be born intoslavery.Thebelievermustbewareofbeing tempted into slavery, as thefishisenticedintothenet.Hemusttakeheedthatheisnotensnaredandoverwhelmedbythepoliciesofmen.WearewarnedintheWordtotakeheedthatnonedeceiveus(Eph.5.6;2Cor.4.8;2Thess.2.3),as if itwereinourpowertopreventit.Andsoitis!Wecanonlybeensnaredbyourownfault.Weoftenbetrayawayourlibertywhenwemightmaintainit;andthuswebecometheservantsofmen.

This fault arises either from weakness of head, or fromwickedness ofheart. It ismy exhortation therefore to all Christians tomaintain theirChristianfreedombyconstantwatchfulness.Youmustnotbetemptedor

threatenedout of it; youmustnot be bribed or frightened from it; youmustnot leteitherforceor fraudrobyouof it.Towhatpurpose is it tomaintain it against the Papists, who are the open enemies of it, andagainstotherswhowouldtake it fromus,andyetgive itupto thembyourownhands,yea,tothemperhapswhodonotseekitfromus?Nothingismoreusual.Wemustthereforebeware.Wemustnotgiveupourselvesto theopinionofothermen, though theybenever so learned,never soholy,merelybecause it is theiropinion.Theapostledirectsus to tryallthingsandtoholdfastthatwhichisgood(1Thess.5.21).Itoftenhappensthatahighesteemofothersinrespectoftheirlearningandpietymakesmentakeupallupontrustfromsuch,andtosubmittheir judgmentstotheiropinions,andtheirconsciencestotheirprecepts.Thisshouldnotbeso. Men will suspect a truth if a liar affirms it. For this reason Christwouldnotownthedevils'acknowledgmentofHim,whentheysaid'ThouarttheSonofGod'.Butmenarereadytobelieveanerror,togivecredittoanuntruth,ifanhonestandfaithfulmanaffirmsit.Whateversuchamansays comes with a great deal of authority into men's spirits. Yet it ispossibleforsuchmentobemistaken.

It is a most dangerous thing to have men's persons in too muchadmiration,aswearewarnedinJude16.Weknowbutinpart(iCor.13.12).Thebest are imperfect inknowledge.For themost learnedand forthe holymartyrswemustmake due allowance. They are butmen, andthereby theyare liable toerr, though itmaybegranted that, since theyarelearnedandholy, it ishighlyprobablethatwhattheyspeakistruth.Butlearningandholinessarenotinfallibleevidences.Thereismuchheedtobegiventolearnedandholymen,butwearenottotieourboattotheirship,or,as thephrase is,pinour faithupontheirsleeves.Wemustnotsubject our judgments, and rest our faith, upon their authority. Thiswould be tomakemenmasters of our faith. Thiswould be a thread ofthat garment whereby Babylon is distinguished, a mark of theantichristianChurchofRome.Itwouldcauseour faith torestupontheauthorityofmen.Thisisnottobeourpractice,thoughIgrantthatitisdone (thoughmore finely done) by many, even as by those Papists ofwhomimplicitfaithandblindobediencearerequired.

Suffer the continued work of exhortation. It is your duty to labour to

maintain Christian freedom. It was dearly purchased for you andmercifullybestowedonyou,andthereforeshouldnotbeweaklylost.Norshoulditbemaintainedinawilfulway.Itwasgiveninmercyandmustbekeptinjudgment.Wemustusethejudgmentofdiscretioninrejectingor embracing doctrines.We are neither blindly to subject ourselves tothem,nomatterhowholyandlearnedtheymaybewhoteachthem,norarewe to reject them perversely. Somuch, then, byway of the secondpartofthisexhortation.Butthereisstillsomethingmore.

(ii)NottoabuseChristianliberty

Beware of abusing our liberty in Christ. Christian liberty is a preciousthing; and themore precious, themore care is needed not to abuse it.Preciousthingsareusuallycommendedtouswithwordsofcaution.ThatImaynot speak into the air, Imust say that there are variousways inwhichChristianlibertymaybeabused.Weabuseitwhen,intheuseofit,we cause grief to others. Liberty was purchased for the comfort ofourselves,notfortheafflictingofothers.Theyabuseitwhosouseitastogrieveothers.WereadofsomeyoungChristiansatCorinthwhoatemeatoffered to idols, for the sole purpose of showing their liberty. But theapostle tells them: 'All things are lawful for me, but all things are notexpedient' (i Cor. 10. 24). The same apostle is frequent in instructingChristians how to exercise their liberty without causing scandal.'Brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for anoccasion to the flesh,butby love serveoneanother' (Gal. 5. 13).Christhas takenoff our former yoke of bondage, not thatwe should bemorewanton,butmorecareful.ItisindeedforourcomfortthatHehasdoneit,butnottodestroyothers,as theapostleargues in1Cor.8.11:Throughthyknowledgeshalltheweakbrotherperish,forwhomChristdied'.

But Iwillhasten toa conclusion, sowill includeall else in a finalbriefword.ThereisanotherwayinwhichwemayabuseChristianliberty,andthat is, when we use it to admit superstition.Many will say they haveChristian liberty, and therefore dare venture upon any observances,customs, and practices, although never warranted by the Word. ThisindeedisChristianlicentiousness,notChristianliberty.Christianlibertyisalibertyboundedbylawsandrules.Thosewhodoawaywithallsuch

boundsarethereforelibertines.

WeabuseChristianlibertywhenwemakevoidthelawofGod,asIhavealready shown at length; when we judge it our liberty to be exemptedfromduty.Thisistruebondageratherthantrueliberty.Thelibertyofabelieverliesnotinexemptionfromservice,butinservice;andsurelythatmanisyetinbondagewhodoesnotjudgeservicetobehisliberty.

Wealsoabuseour libertywhenwegive toomuchscope toourselves inthingsthatarelawful.Itisaneasythingtorunfromusetoabuse.Ofsuchmen Jude speaks in the fourth verse of his epistle: There are certainmen...whoturnthegraceofourGodintowantonness'.Wealsoabuseitwhen we use it undutifully, denying obedience to lawful authority inthingslawful,uponpretenceofChristianliberty;whichistantamounttotheoverthrowingofalllawfulauthority.Weabuseitalsowhenwewillbetiedtonothingbutwhatourownspiritsinclineusto.Ofthis,too,Ihavespoken at large, and therefore I shall conclude with the words of theapostleiniPet.2.16:Youarefree,butusenotyourlibertyforacloakofmaliciousness,butastheservantsofGod.