C 229) oiled forts of Juftification that will fitly bear that name ( I mean of Aaual Juftification of fuch perfons, ) the firit in Or- der is Conflitutive luflification, or Making I& : and therefore if I prove that this is not before Faith, it mutt needs follow that the reft are not. I confefs the grounds of their mistake do call lowdeft for a Confutation. I . That We dyedWithOra:ft, or fa- tisfied in him or fulfilled theLaw in him. 2. That Quiff is gi- ven to us in fpecial manner more then to others, ( the not- Elea) before we believe. Againft both thefe I,would oppofe thefe two Conclufions. I. We did neither Really, nor in Gods Account, Dye with Chrift when hedyed, nor inhim fatisfie Gods juftice , nor fulfil the Law. Con, 2. Though Chrift were given for the Elea, more then others, yet is he no more given to them then others, before they are born,er before they have Faith.The frit of thefe is offo great moment, and is theheart and root of fomany Errors yea of the whole bodyof Antinomianifm, that I had rather writeas great a volumn as this againft it,then leave it with fo briefa touch as here I mull do, if I fhould particularly fall upon it.Let it there- fore now fuffice, to tell the Affirmers, that it is their part to prove it, which I think, theywill never be able to do while Scripture is taken for Gods Word. SECT. III. §. 3 Will come therefore to the point in queftion, and prove this Conclufion contrary to theirs. Conclu. 2Cy man now living was lug ardoned, or Abfol- ved aCtuallyfrom theguilt of fin, and Obligation to Death, at the time of Chri f s death, or underta102g. orfrom eternity or at any time before he Was born, or before he didbelleve ; ( or being an In- fant, hada Believing Parent.) Though I think it reafonable that the Cafe of Infants and * I meannot Heathens that hear not' the Word , ihould be * laid by in this wheiher they difpute, leaft the cafe be carried into the dark, and men argue fiarced:abfi oj1fitbie- min1,ss manner. G g 3
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=