a t4 Some Arg. vindicated from Mr. Baxter's exceptions. C H A p, Proteft *tit or Papiff , dreamed of fuck a thing. If by tiefe termes, he mea- ne fach, are now not guilty legally of the charge brought in againft them; this we acknowledge , and mutt acknowledge or we know not how any fball ever be juftified ; for God will not pronounce finners , as fuch , really and legally to be righteous , His judgment being according to truth : & the - refore becaufe we have no-righteoufnefs within us, whereupon we can be pronounced not guilty , we mutt have a Righteoufnefs imputed to us , even the Surety - righteoufnefs of Chrifl. But Mr. Baxter, it feemeth, will not underffand, what this legal non - guiltinefs is; & yet in matters among men it is very clear and manifeft. If Paul had folly Satis.fied,4according as he un- dertook, Philemon, for the wrongs and injuries done him by Onefintus; If Qnefamus had been convented before a judge for thefe fame crimes and In- juries, & had produced the Satisfaction made by his Surety Paul, & ac- cepted by the creditor Philemon, would not the judge have had groun.1 in Law & equity, to pronounce Onefimus not guilty, & therefore not to be punif- bed according as was libelled againft him ? And yet though Onefmus had been pronounced Innocent , that is , not-guilty , as to Crimes and Injuries alleiged againft him , in this cafe , in a legal fenfe , it would not follow, that he had never committed thefe wrongs ; nor had the evincing of that been necefïary to his Abfolution and juflification. His Legal Innocency or Righ- teoufnefs , by vertue of t-he Satisfaction made by his Surety , now judicial - ly accounted & reputed his , being Sufficient. Thefe things are plaine to fuch , aséwill but open their eyes : but all the world cannot make them plai- ne to fuck, as will undertfand nothing , but what is call int lriflotelian Metaphyfical Mould. Were it not loft laboure for any to enquire, what is the Matter &. Ferme of this legal Righteoufnefs of Onefamus? Whereof is it conftitute ? How came Paul's righteoufnefs CO be his, and fo one acci- dent to go from fubjeEtto fubjet ? whether was Paul's fatisfaction the Effi- cient, or Conftitutive caufe of Onefamus his Innocency, or non- guiltinefs, add thelike ? The 5. O/ jell is , How can God accept him , as juft , who is really & reputedly a fanner ? This difhonoureth His Holinefs and Juflice. To this he faith. Not fo: cannot God pardon fin upon a valuable Merite, d7 Satisfatlion of dS Mediator ? ¿'though He judge us not perfect now, dß accept us not, as fuch; Yet. I. Now he judgeth us holy. 2. .And the members ofa perfect Saviour. 3. And will make us perfett and fpotlefs , and then fo judge us , having wafhed us fiom our fins,, in the bloud of the Lamb. AnJ; All this giveth no fatasfaction to the objection; for the objection fpeaketh of acceptance in,Jullification, & confequeritly of that acceptation, that preceedeth Sanctification. (2.) It is true, God can & doth pardon fans; but meer pardon of fins is not jufl;ifi- cation, the perfon muff be accepted, as righteous; and yet by Mr. Bax- ter's way , the man hath no righteoufnefs, to ground fuch a judgment and acceptation : and God's judgment being alwayes according to truth, the juftified man muff be righteous , that he may be accounted & accepted as Righteous, in Jutlification. Therefore either Mr. Baxter muff grant, that Ile is Righteous through the Imputed Righteoufnefs of Chriht; or that he is Righ
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=