.æ4o Mr. Baxter's further oppo f tion to Impur, exámined. C ft A P. 16, & are under the Curie of that Covenant ; and all their Actions, afterward committed are further fins & violations of that Covenant : for we may not think , that Adam , after his firft fin was not in cafe to violat that Covenant any more : And though before any man was born, the new Covenant , or. Gofpel waspromulgat; yet , notwithstanding thereof, all men were born under the Curfeof the firit Covenant , and were never delivered from under that, untill they doled with the termes of the fecond Covenant , or Cove- nant of Grace. But he faith 2. All the duty in tke world, which we are bound unto, is to be done for Euangelical ends , for recovery , grace l? unto gratitude. All; And was not Adam before the fall alió bound unto gratitude ? But he pofíibly mea- neth gratitude for Redemption , yet he hath proved , that all the world Heathens, I meane, & fuch as never heard of the Gofpel are obliged to Gratitude, upon the account of Redemption : or that all , that is required of them , is CO be done for Gofpel ends. But in all this , I am little concern- ed , who fee no necellîty of rettricking Chrift's obedience fo. S. He faith. That we fee not , that our own anfwere implieth the truth, of what he and others offert; and is the fame which they give, but our caufe is uncapable of. What then faith he & his ? Ije Jay ( faith he ) that Chriff did indeed moll perfectly obey the Law of Innocency , fò far for us , d5 in our ¡lead ( though not in our perfons ) as doing that, which we should have done d r did not ; t bath merited for us a better Covenant , which obligeth us not at all to obey for the ends of the fìrft Covenant vii, that our perfetlion might be our &ighteoufnefs , or the Condition of life ; but only to obey for the ends of the New Covenant , for the ob. raining e improving of recovering grace & Salvation by Chrifl freely given us, which weourfelvesmufldo, or perish. Anf. (r) If Chrift obeyed for us, and in our ftead , 1 fee not why he may not be faid to do it , as our Surety , and fo in our Law perfon , feing, according to our Common difcourfe , the Su- rety & Principal debtor are one perron in Law. But about ambiguous ter- mes , we need not debate. It is of greater moment to differ, as to this, that hethinketh the uscompr _ hendeth all perlons, Elect & Reprobar. (2) That Chrift did merite the New Covenant, is nowhere Paid in Scripture; & yet this is all , that Mr. Baxter here mentioneth , as merited by Him. (3) I think , lie is as much concerned , as we are , to loofe his own difficulties, formerly propofed : for. I. How can He be Paid , to have fulfilled all the Law for us , that did not fulfill it to all due ends ? 2. Can the Law require more than abfolute perfection? 3. Was not abfolute perfection in Chrift's holy Obedience ? 4. Is not gratitude an end required in the Law of Innocen cy ? 5, If Chrift fulfilled only the Law of Innocency, did he not fulfill the Law for Adam & Eve only, or for us, as in them &c. Let him anfwere the - fe himfelf , and he shall help us. Next (n. Igo.) he bringeth fome in laying. That we may as wel fay, that man mutt not die, becaufe Chrift died for us; as not obey becaufe Chrift ob- eyed for us, & then telsus, that we flrangelyufe their reafonagainfl ourfelver, . know it not. But what if this be his miltake ? Let us hear his reafon. For we (ay (faith he) that wemufi die, becaufe we did not perfealy either obey the Lau , er fufier ail its penalty, by Chrift, as our legal perfon 3 but he fu ffered only
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=