Wilson - BS2663 W54 653

I Ver. i7. the Epifile to the Ròmanes. S I L. Yea,it commended' unto us the difference b2tween the Law and the Go- fpell, how the rfghteoufneffe of the one is dittinguilhed from the ocher: For the righteoufnelle of the Law required' workes,and the fulfilling of the com- mandements. Levic. 1S. 5. ;al. 3. 12. But the Gofpell faith [The iusg by Faith (hall live.] The righteoulneffe of the Law, is a perle& obedience; the righte- oulneffe of theGofpel, is an imputation thereofto the Ele& finner,at what time hebeleeveth, Rom. 4.24. The righte- ourneffe of the Gofpel,God giveth unto us, but the righteoulnefîe of the Law, men do give it to God. There is good are of this difference, and is to be held conttantiy,becaufe it freeç[[h the troubled confcience from fnares afd perplexities, when hee (hall perceive,that ehc.ugh hee lacke good workes,and bee full ofwick- ed manners, yet unto the forgiveneffe offinnes,and abfolution before God, it is enough onely to beleeve in Chrifl,ac- cording to the Gofpell. Secondly, it takes from man all taure of reioycing and glorying in himfelfe, that hee may glory only in this; that he knowes God to be ntercifull,to pardon his finne,and accept him for righteous, when by his finfull workes and rranfgreflìons of the Law, he deferved death. Ier.9.23. DIALOGUE X. Verte r8. For the wrath ofGod ie revealed from hea- ven again fi all ungodlineffe and unrighte- oafne fe of men, which with -hold the truth in unrigbteoufnefe. TIMO THE U S. wHat i, the drifi of this Text,and how dethit depend upon,andfort with the former verl ? S e L. The drift and purpofe,is to con- firme the maine and grand propofition, that [inners are iuflified and raved by the faith of the Gofpell. The argument is from the contrary ; finners are not juftified by their workes, therefore by faith. For in the taure of Juftification, faith and workes have the condition of 29 contraries, Rom. /1.6. Now, touching things which be immediately contrary, the maxime and rule is ; that when the one is denied, the other is affirmed; and what is taken from the one, is given to the other; itdoth then neceffarily f ol- low, that righteoufneffe mull be had by faith, feeing it cannot be had by works. And why not by workes ? Was it not the conamon and generally received o- pinion,both amongft Philofophers,and the Jewes themfelves ; that workes were the caufe of righteoufneffe ? To this fe- cree objection the Apoftie anfwereth by a reafon taken from the contrary effeas, as thus ; Men cannot bee righteous by their workes,becaufe their workes were wicked and unjufl, and therefore puni- fned of God, which hee proveth by a diffributiott of Gentiles, unto Chap .2. verle 17. And thence forward of the Jewes, till Chap. 3. verfe 22. Ti M, How many thing, are neted in this Text ? S e L. Three : Firs, that the Gentiles had knowledg of God and good things, naturally ingraffed in them, fignified by the word [truth.] Secondly,that they violated the Law of nature in refpe& of duties to God and man,by ungodlineffe and unrighteouflseff-e. Thirdly, that they were punifhed of God mightily, [Wrath fromheaven.] TI la. Begin with that part yee named laf,becaufeit is firfi mentioned in the Text. What it meant by [ Wrath t] is there any fetch pa ffion of anger and wrath in God? Se L. In holy Scriptures [ Wrath and Anger] bee otherwife attributed unto men, then unto God. For, it is in men properly, as it is a perturbation of the mind, inflaming or flirting up to re. venge. Wrath, in his proper acception, is an appetite or defire of revenge, for fonte contempt or hurt, done or íuppo- fed to bee done to our (elves or others, whom we affe&. When men fee them- (elves negle&ed or wronged, ftraight- way they are moved to take vengeance on the party : thus it is in men;thc truth whereof; appeareth in Cain, Efau, A- chab,&e. Whereas in God, wrath is (no affe &ion) but a juS aet of God, puni- D 3 thing

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=