in the Ep1les of S. Paul, &c. 447 Righteoa fnef for the Reunion of fns, that are pall, through the forbearance of God. To declare, Ifay, at this time, his Kigh- teoufnefs', that he might be fuß, and the ,7uflifaer of them that believe in 7efus. Here it is, that we may, and ought if any where, to exiled the intereft of our perfonal obedience under force qualification or other, in our Juftification to be declared. For if it fhould be fuppofed (which yet it cannot with any pretence of R.eafon) that in the foregoing difcourfe, the Apoftle had excluded only the Works of the Lam, as abfolutely perfeti, or as wrought in our own flrength without the aid of Grace, or as meritorious 3 yet having generally excluded all Works from our Juftification, Ver. 20. Without diftin?tion or limitati- on, it might well be expe&ed, and ought to have been fo ; that upon the full Declaration which he gives us of the na- ture and way of our Juftification in all the caufes of it, he lhould have affigned the place, and con!deration which our own perfonal Righteoufnefs had in our Juftification before God ; the firft or fecond, or continuation of it, fomewhat or other, or at leaft, made Tome mention of it, under the qualification of gracious,fincere, or Evangelical, that it might not feem to be abfolutely excluded. It is plain the Apoftle thought of no fuch thing, nor was at all folicitous about any refle6tion that might be made on his Doctrine, as though it overthrew the neceffity of our own obedience. Take in the confideration of the Apoftles defign, with the circum- ftances of the context, and the Argument from his utter fence, about our own perfonal Righteoufneß in our Juftifica- tton before God, is unanfwerable. But this is not all ; we !hall find in our progrefs, that it is exprefly and direaly ex- cluded by him.. All unprejudiced perlons muft needs think that no words could be ufed, more exprefs and emphatical, to fecure the whole, of our Juftification unto the Freegrace of God',. through:
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=