XVIII. The nature of justification as declared in the epistles of St.
Paul, in that unto the Romans especially.--Chap. 3 [4,5,10; 1 Cor.1:30; 2
Cor.5:21; Gal.2:16; Eph.2:8-10; Phil.3:8,9.]

Testimonies out of the Epistles of Paul the apostle--His design in the
fifth chapter to the Romans--That design explained at large, and applied
to the present argument--Chap.3:24-26 explained, and the true sense of
the words vindicated--The causes of justification enumerated--Apostolical
inference from the consideration of them--Chap.4, design of the
disputation of the apostle therein Analysis of his discourse--Verses 4,
5, particularly insisted on; their true sense vindicated--What works
excluded from the justification of Abraham--Who it is that works not--In
what sense the ungodly are justified--All men ungodly antecedently unto
their justification--Faith alone the means of justification on our part--
Faith itself, absolutely considered, not the righteousness that is
imputed unto us--Proved by sundry arguments
Rom.5:l2-21--Boasting excluded in ourselves, asserted in God--The design
and sum of the apostle's argument--Objection of Socinus removed--
Comparison between the two Adams, and those that derive from them--Sin
entered into the world--What sin intended--Death, what it comprises, what
intended by it--The sense of these words, "inasmuch," or, "in whom all
have sinned," cleared and vindicated--The various oppositions used by the
apostle in this discourse: principally between sin or the fall, and the
free gift; between the disobedience of the one, and the obedience of
another; judgment on the one hand, and justification unto life on the
other--The whole context at large explained, and the argument for
justification by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, fully
confirmed
Rom.10:3,4, explained and insisted on to the same purpose
1 Cor.1:30--Christ, how of God made righteousness unto us--Answer of
Bellarmine unto this testimony removed--That of Socinus disproved--True
sense of the words evinced
2 Cor.5:21--In what sense Christ knew no sin--Emphasis in that
expression--How he was made sin for us--By the imputation of sin unto
him--Mistakes of some about this expression--Sense of the ancients--
Exception of Bellarmine unto this testimony answered, with other
reasonings of his to the same purpose--The exceptions of others also
removed
Gal.2:16
Eph.2:8-10--Evidence of this testimony--Design of the apostle from the
beginning of the chapter--Method of the apostle in the declaration of the
grace of God--Grace alone the cause of deliverance from a state of sin--
Things to be observed in the assignation of the causes of spiritual
deliverances--Grace, how magnified by him--Force of the argument and
evidence from thence--State of the case here proposed by the apostle--
General determination of it, "By grace are ye saved"--What is it to be
saved, inquired into--The same as to be justified, but not exclusively--
The causes of our justification declared positively and negatively--The
whole secured unto the grace of God by Christ, and our interest therein
through faith alone--Works excluded--What works?--Not works of the law of
Moses--Not works antecedent unto believing--Works of true believers--Not
only in opposition to the grace of God, but to faith in us--Argument from
those words--Reason whereon this exclusion of works is founded--To
exclude boasting on our part--Boasting, wherein it consists--Inseparable
from the interest of works in justification--Danger of it--Confirmation
of this reason, obviating an objection--The objection stated--If we be
not justified by works, of what use are they? answered
Phil.3:8,9--Heads of argument from this testimony--Design of the context-
-Righteousness the foundation of acceptance with God--A twofold
righteousness considered by the apostle--Opposite unto one another, as
unto the especial and inquired after--Which of these he adhered unto, his
own righteousness, or the righteousness of God; declared by the apostle
with vehemency of speech--Reasons of his earnestness herein--The turning
point whereon he left Judaism--The opposition made unto this doctrine by
the Jews--The weight of the doctrine, and unwillingness of men to receive
it--His own sense of sin and grace--Peculiar expressions used in this
place, for the reasons mentioned, concerning Christ; concerning all
things that are our own--The choice to be made on the case stated,
whether we will adhere unto our own righteousness, or that of Christ's,
which are inconsistent as to the end of justification--Argument from this
place--Exceptions unto this testimony, and argument from thence, removed--
Our personal righteousness inherent, the same with respect unto the law
and gospel --External righteousness only required by the law, an impious
imagination--Works wrought before faith only rejected--The exception
removed--Righteousness before conversion, not intended by the apostle
 

That the way and manner of our justification before God, with all the
causes and means of it, are designedly declared by the apostle in the
Epistle to the Romans, chap.3,4,5, as also vindicated from objections, so
as to render his discourse thereon the proper seat of this doctrine, and
whence it is principally to be learned, cannot modestly be denied. The
late exceptions of some, that this doctrine of justification by faith
without works is found only in the writings of St. Paul, and that his
writings are obscure and intricate, are both false and scandalous to
Christian religion, so as that, in this place, we shall not afford them
the least consideration. He wrote "hupo Pneumatos hagiou feromenos",--as
he was "moved by the Holy Ghost." And as all the matter delivered by him
was sacred truth, which immediately requires our faith and obedience, so
the way and manner wherein he declared it was such as the Holy Ghost
judged most expedient for the edification of the church. And as he said
himself with confidence, that if the gospel which he preached, and as it
was preached by him, though accounted by them foolishness, was hid, so as
that they could not understand nor comprehend the mystery of it, it was
"hid unto them that are lost;" so we may say, that if what he delivers in
particular concerning our justification before God seems obscure,
difficult, or perplexed unto us, it is from our prejudices, corrupt
affections, or weakness of understanding at best, not able to comprehend
the glory of this mystery of the grace of God in Christ, and not from any
defect in his way and manner of the revelation of it. Rejecting,
therefore, all such perverse insinuations, in a due sense of our own
weakness, and acknowledgment that at best we know but in part, we shall
humbly inquire into the blessed revelation of this great mystery of the
justification of a sinner before God, as by him declared in those
chapters of his glorious Epistle to the Romans; and I shall do it with
all briefness possible, so as not, on this occasion, to repeat what has
been already spoken, or to anticipate what may be spoken in place more
convenient.

   The first thing he does is to prove all men to be under sin, and to be
guilty before God. This he gives as the conclusion of his preceding
discourse, from chap.1:18, or what he had evidently evinced thereby,
chap.3:19,23. Hereon an inquiry does arise, how any of them come to be
justified before God? And whereas justification is a sentence upon the
consideration of a righteousness, his grand inquiry is, what that
righteousness is, on the consideration whereof a man may be so justified?
And concerning this, he affirms expressly that it is not the
righteousness of the law, nor of the works of it; whereby what he does
intend has been in part before declared, and will be farther manifested
in the process of our discourse. Wherefore, in general, he declares that
the righteousness whereby we are justified is the righteousness of God,
in opposition unto any righteousness of our own, chap.1:17; 3:21,22. And
he describes this righteousness of God by three properties:--1. That it
is "choris nomou",--"without the law," verse 21; separated in all its
concerns from the law; not attainable by it, nor any works of it, which
they have no influence into. It is neither our obedience unto the law,
nor attainable thereby. Nor can any expression more separate and exclude
the works of obedience unto the law from any concernment in it than this
does. Wherefore, whatever is, or can be, performed by ourselves in
obedience unto the law, is rejected from any interest in this
righteousness of God, or the procurement of it to be made ours. 2. That
yet it "is witnessed unto by the law," verse 21: "The law and the
prophets."

   The apostle, by this distinction of the books of the Old Testament
into "the law and the prophets," manifests that by the "law" he
understands the books of Moses. And in them testimony is given unto this
righteousness of God four ways:--

   (1.) By a declaration of the causes of the necessity of it unto our
justification. This is done in the account given of our apostasy from
God, of the loss of his image, and the state of sin that ensued thereon;
for hereby an end was put unto all possibility and hope of acceptance
with God by our own personal righteousness. By the entrance of sin our
own righteousness went out of the world; so that there must be another
righteousness prepared and approved of God, and called "the righteousness
of God," in opposition unto our own, or all relation of love and favour
between God and man must cease forever.

   (2.) In the way of recovery from this state, generally declared in the
first promise of the blessed seed, by whom this righteousness of God was
to be wrought and introduced; for he alone was "to make an end of sin,
and to bring in everlasting righteousness," "tsedek 'olamim", Dan.9:24;
that righteousness of God that should be the means of the justification
of the church in all ages, and under all dispensations.

   (3.) By stopping up the way unto any other righteousness, through the
threatening of the law, and that curse which every transgression of it
was attended withal. Hereby it was plainly and fully declared that there
must be such a righteousness provided for our justification before men as
would answer and remove that curse.

   (4.) In the prefiguration and representation of that only way and
means whereby this righteousness of God was to be wrought. This it did in
all its sacrifices, especially in the great anniversary sacrifice on the
day of expiation, wherein all the sins of the church were laid on the
head of the sacrifice, and so carried away.

   3. He describes it by the only way of our participation of it, the
only means on our part of the communication of it unto us. And this is by
faith alone: "The righteousness of God which is by the faith of Jesus
Christ unto all and upon all them that believe; for there is no
difference," Rom.3:22. Faith in Christ Jesus is so the only way and means
whereby this righteousness of God comes upon us, or is communicated unto
us, that it is so unto all that have this faith, and only unto them; and
that without difference on the consideration of any thing else besides.
And although faith, taken absolutely, may be used in various senses, yet,
as thus specified and limited, the faith of Christ Jesus, or, as he calls
it, "the faith that is in me," Acts 26:18, it can intend nothing but the
reception of him, and trust in him, as the ordinance of God for
righteousness and salvation.

   This description of the righteousness of God revealed in the gospel,
which the apostle asserts as the only means and cause of our
justification before God, with the only way of its participation and
communication unto us, by the faith of Christ Jesus, fully confirms the
truth we plead for. For if the righteousness wherewith we must be
justified before God be not our own, but the righteousness of God, as
these things are directly opposed, Phil.3:9; and the only way whereby it
comes upon us, or we are made partakers of it, is by the faith of Jesus
Christ; then our own personal, inherent righteousness or obedience has no
interest in our justification before God: which argument is insoluble,
nor is the force of it to be waived by any distinctions whatever, if we
keep our hearts unto a due reverence of the authority of God in his word.

   Having fully proved that no men living have any righteousness of their
own whereby they may be justified, but are all shut up under the guilt of
sin; and having declared that there is a righteousness of God now fully
revealed in the gospel, whereby alone we may be so, leaving all men in
themselves unto their own lot, inasmuch as "all have sinned and come
short of the glory of God;"--he proceeds to declare the nature of our
justification before God in all the causes of it, Rom.3:2~26, "Being
justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ
Jesus: whom God has set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his
blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are
past, through the forbearance of God, to declare, I say, at this time his
righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of them that
believe in Jesus".

   Here it is that we may and ought, if anywhere, to expect the interest
of our personal obedience, under some qualification or other, in our
justification to be declared. For if it should be supposed (which yet it
cannot, with any pretence of reason) that, in the foregoing discourse,
the apostle had excluded only the works of the law as absolutely perfect,
or as wrought in our own strength without the aid of grace, or as
meritorious; yet having generally excluded all works from our
justification, verse 20, without distinction or limitation, it might well
be expected, and ought to have been so, that, upon the full declaration
which he gives us of the nature and way of our justification, in all the
causes of it, he should have assigned the place and consideration which
our own personal righteousness had in our justification before God,--the
first, or second, or continuation of it, somewhat or other,--or at least
made some mention of it, under the qualification of gracious, sincere, or
evangelical, that it might not seem to be absolutely excluded. It is
plain the apostle thought of no such thing, nor was at all solicitous
about any reflection that might be made on his doctrine, as though it
overthrew the necessity of our own obedience. Take in the consideration
of the apostle's design, with the circumstances of the context, and the
argument from his utter silence about our own personal righteousness, in
our justification before God, is unanswerable. But this is not all; we
shall find, in our progress, that it is expressly and directly excluded
by him.

   All unprejudiced persons must needs think, that no words could be used
more express and emphatical to secure the whole of our justification unto
the free grace of God, through the blood or mediation of Christ, wherein
it is faith alone that gives us an interest, than these used here by the
apostle. And, for my part, I shall only say, that I know not how to
express myself in this matter in words and terms more express or
significant of the conception of my mind. And if we could all but
subscribe the answer here given by the apostle, how, by what means, on
what grounds, or by what causes, we are justified before God,--namely,
that "we are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that
is in Christ Jesus, whom God has set forth to be a propitiation through
faith in his blood," etc.,-- there might be an end of this controversy.

   But the principal passages of this testimony must be distinctly
considered. First, the principal efficient cause is first expressed with
a peculiar emphasis, or the "causa proegoumene". "Dikaioumenoi doorean
tei autou chariti",--"Being justified freely by his grace." God is the
principal efficient cause of our justification, and his grace is the only
moving cause thereof. I shall not stay upon the exception of those of the
Roman church,--namely, that by "tei chariti autou" (which their
translation renders "per gratiam Dei"), the internal, inherent grace of
God, which they make the formal cause of justification, is intended; for
they have nothing to prove it but that which overthrows it, namely, that
it is added unto "doorean", "freely;" which were needless, if it signify
the free grace or favour of God: for both these expressions, "gratis per
gratiam," "freely by grace," are put together to give the greater
emphasis unto this assertion, wherein the whole of our justification is
vindicated unto the free grace of God. So far as they are
distinguishable, the one denotes the principle from whence our
justification proceeds,--namely, grace; and the other, the manner of its
operation,--it works freely. Besides, the grace of God in this subject
does everywhere constantly signify his goodness, love, and favour; as has
been undeniably proved by many. See Rom.5:15; Eph.2:4,8,9; 2 Tim.1:9;
Tit.3:4,5.

   "Being justified "doorean" (so the LXX render the Hebrew particle
"chinam"),--"without price," without merit, without cause;--and sometimes
it is used for "without end;" that is, what is done in vain, as "doorean"
is used by the apostle, Gal.2:21;--without price or reward, Gen.29:15;
Exod.21:2; 2 Sam.24:24;--without cause, or merit, or any means of
procurement, 1 Sam.19:5; Ps.69:4; in this sense it is rendered by
"doorean", John 15:25. The design of the word is to exclude all
consideration of any thing in us that should be the cause or condition of
our justification. "Charis", "favour," absolutely considered, may have
respect unto somewhat in him towards whom it is showed. So it is said
that Joseph found grace or favour, "charin", in the eyes of Potiphar,
Gen.39:4: but he found it not "doorean", without any consideration or
cause; for he "saw that the LORD was with him, and made all that he did
to prosper in his hand," verse 3. But no words can be found out to free
our justification before God from all respect unto any thing in
ourselves, but only what is added expressly as the means of its
participation on our part, through faith in his blood, more emphatical
than these here used by the apostle: "Doorean tei autou chariti",--
"Freely by his grace." And with whom this is not admitted, as exclusive
of all works or obedience of our own, of all conditions, preparations,
and merit, I shall despair of ever expressing my conceptions about it
intelligibly unto them.

   Having asserted this righteousness of God as the cause and means of
our justification before him, in opposition unto all righteousness of our
own, and declared the cause of the communication of it unto us on the
part of God to be mere free, sovereign grace, the means on our part
whereby, according unto the ordination of God, we do receive, or are
really made partakers of, that righteousness of God whereon we are
justified, is by faith: "Dia tes pisteoos en outou haimati",--that is,
"By faith alone," Nothing else is proposed, nothing else required unto
this end. It is replied, that there is no intimation that it is by faith
alone, or that faith is asserted to be the means of our justification
exclusively unto other graces or works. But there is such an exclusion
directly included in the description given of that faith whereby we are
justified, with respect unto its especial object,--"By faith in his
blood;" for faith respecting the blood of Christ as that whereby
propitiation was made for sin,--in which respect alone the apostle
affirms that we are justified through faith,--admits of no association
with any other graces or duties. Neither is it any part of their nature
to fix on the blood of Christ for justification before God; wherefore
they are all here directly excluded. And those who think otherwise may
try how they can introduce them into this contempt without an evident
corrupting of it, and perverting of its sense. Neither will the other
evasion yield our adversaries the least relief,--namely, that by faith,
not the single grace of faith is intended, but the whole obedience
required in the new covenant, faith and works together. For as all works
whatever, as our works, are excluded in the declaration of the causes of
our justification on the part of God ("doorean tei outou chariti",--
"Freely by his grace"), by virtue of that great rule, Rom.11:6, "If by
grace, then no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace;" so the
determination of the object of faith in its act or duty, whereon we are
justified,--namely, the blood of Christ,--is absolutely exclusive of all
works from an interest in that duty; for whatever looks unto the blood of
Christ for justification is faith, and nothing else. And as for the
calling of it a single act or duty, I refer the reader unto our preceding
discourse about the nature of justifying faith.

   Three things the apostle infers from the declaration he had made of
the nature and causes of our justification before God, all of them
farther illustrating the meaning and sense of his words:--

   1. That boasting is excluded: "Pou oun he kauchesi? exekleisthe",
chap.3:27. Apparent it is from hence, and from what he affirms concerning
Abraham, chap.4:2, that a great part, at least, of the controversy he had
about justification, was, whether it did admit of any "kauchesis" or
"kauchema" in those that were justified. And it is known that the Jews
placed all their hopes in those things whereof they thought they could
boast,--namely, their privileges and their righteousness. But from the
declaration made of the nature and causes of justification, the apostle
infers that all boasting whatever is utterly shut out of doors,--
"exekleisthe". Boasting, in our language is the name of a vice; and is
never used in a good sense. But "kauchesis" and "kauchema", the words
used by the apostle, are "ek toon mesoon",--of an indifferent
signification; and, as they are applied, may denote a virtue as well as a
vice: so they do, Heb.3:6.

   But always, and in all places, they respect something that is peculiar
in or unto them unto whom they are ascribed. Wherever any thing is
ascribed unto one, and not unto another, with respect unto any good end,
there is fundamentum "kaucheseoos",--a "foundation for boasting." All
this, says the apostle, in the matter of our justification, is utterly
excluded. But wherever respect is had unto any condition or qualification
in one more than another, especially if it be of works, it gives a ground
of boasting, as he affirms, Rom.4:2. And it appears, from comparing that
verse with this, that wherever there is any influence of our own works
into our justification, there is a ground of boasting; but in evangelical
justification no such boasting in any kind can be admitted. Wherefore,
there is no place for works in our justification before God; for if there
were, it is impossible but that a "kauchema", in one kind or other,
before God or man, must be admitted.

   2. He infers a general conclusion, "That a man is justified by faith,
without the works of the law," chap.3:28. What is meant by "the law," and
what by "the works of the law," in this discourse of the apostle about
our justification, has been before declared. And if we are justified
freely through faith in the blood of Christ, that faith which has the
propitiation of Christ for its especial object, or as it has so, can take
no other grace nor duty into partnership with itself therein; and being
so justified as that all such boasting is excluded as necessarily results
from any differencing graces or works in ourselves, wherein all the works
of the law are excluded, it is certain that it is by faith alone in
Christ that we are justified. All works are not only excluded, but the
way unto their return is so shut up by the method of the apostle's
discourse, that all the reinforcements which the wit of man can give unto
them will never introduce them into our justification before God.

   3. He asserts from hence, that we "do not make void the law through
grace," but establish it, verse 31; which, how it is done, and how alone
it can be done, has been before declared.

   This is the substance of the resolution the apostle gives unto that
great inquiry, how a guilty convinced sinner may come to be justified in
the sight of God?--"The sovereign grace of God, the mediation of Christ,
and faith in the blood of Christ, are all that he requires thereunto."
And whatever notions men may have about justification in other respects,
it will not be safe to venture on any other resolution of this case and
inquiry; nor are we wiser than the Holy Ghost.

   Rom. chap.4. In the beginning of the fourth chapter he confirms what
he had before doctrinally declared, by a signal instance; and this was of
the justification of Abraham, who being the father of the faithful, his
justification is proposed as the pattern of ours, as he expressly
declares, verses 22-24. And some fear things I shall observe on this
instance in our passage unto the fifth verse, where I shall fix our
discourse.

   1. He denies that Abraham was justified by works, verse 2. And,--(1.)
These works were not those of the Jewish law, which alone some pretend to
be excluded from our justification in this place; for they were the works
he performed some hundreds of years before the giving of the law at
Sinai: wherefore they are the works of his moral obedience unto God that
are intended. (2.) Those works must be understood which Abraham had then,
when he is said to be justified in the testimony produced unto that
purpose; but the works that Abraham then had were works of righteousness,
performed in faith and love to God, works of new obedience under the
conduct and aids of the Spirit of God, works required in the covenant of
grace. These are the works excluded from the justification of Abraham.
And these things are plain, express, and evident, not to be eluded by any
distinctions or evasions. All Abraham's evangelical works are expressly
excluded from his justification before God.

   2. He proves by the testimony of Scripture, declaring the nature and
grounds of the justification of Abraham, that he was justified now other
way but that which he had before declared,--namely, by grace, through
faith in Christ Jesus, verse 3. "Abraham believed God" (in the promise of
Christ and his mediation), "and it was counted unto him for
righteousness," verse 3. He was justified by faith in the way before
described (for other justification by faith there is none), in opposition
unto all his own works and personal righteousness thereby.

   3. From the same testimony he declares how he came to be partaker of
that righteousness whereon he was justified before God; which was by
imputation: it was counted or imputed unto him for righteousness. The
nature of imputation has been before declared.

   4. The especial nature of this imputation,--namely, that it is of
grace, without respect unto works,--he asserts and proves, verse 4, from
what is contrary thereunto: "Now to him that worketh is the reward not
reckoned of grace, but of debt." Where works are of any consideration,
there is no room for that kind of imputation whereby Abraham was
justified: for it was a gracious imputation, and that is not of what is
our own antecedently thereunto, but what is made our own by that
imputation; for what is our own cannot be imputed unto us in a way of
grace, but only reckoned ours in a way of debt. That which is our own,
with all the effects of it, is due unto us; and, therefore, they who
plead that faith itself is imputed unto us, to give some countenance unto
an imputation of grace, do say it is imputed not for what it is, for then
it would be reckoned of debt, but for what it is not. So Socinus, "Cum
fides imputatur nobis pro justitia ideo imputatur, quia nec ipsa fides
justitia est, nec vere in se eam continet", De Servat., part 4. cap.2.
Which kind of imputation, being indeed only a false imagination, we have
before disproved. But all works are inconsistent with that imputation
whereby Abraham was justified. It is otherwise with him that works, so as
thereon to be justified, than it was with him. Yea, say some, "All works
that are meritorious, that are performed with an opinion of merit, that
make the reward to be of debt, are excluded; but other works are not."
This distinction is not learned from the apostle; for, according unto
him, if this be merit and meritorious, that the reward be reckoned of
debt, then all works in justification are so. For, without distinction or
limitation, he affirms that "unto him that worketh, the reward is not
reckoned of grace, but of debt." He does not exclude some sort of works,
or works in some sense, because they would make the reward of debt, but
affirms that all would do so, unto the exclusion of gracious imputation;
for if the foundation of imputation be in ourselves, imputation by grace
is excluded. In the fifth verse, the sum of the apostle's doctrine, which
he had contended for, and what he had proved, is expressed: "But to him
that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his
faith is counted for righteousness." It is granted on all hands, that the
close of the verse, "His faith is counted for righteousness," does
express the justification of the person intended. He is justified; and
the way of it is, his faith is counted or imputed. Wherefore, the
foregoing words declare the subject of justification and its
qualification, or the description of the person to be justified, with all
that is required on his part thereunto.

   And, first, it is said of him that he is "ho me ergadzomenos",--"who
worketh not." It is not required unto his justification that he should
not work, that he should not perform any duties of obedience unto God in
any kind, which is working; for every person in the world is always
obliged unto all duties of obedience, according to the light and
knowledge of the will of God, the means whereof is afforded unto him: but
the expression is to be limited by the subject-matter treated of;--he
"who worketh not," with respect unto justification; though not the design
of the person, but the nature of the thing is intended. To say, he who
worketh not is justified through believing, is to say that his works,
whatever they be, have no influence into his justification, nor has God
in justifying of him any respect unto them: wherefore, he alone who
worketh not is the subject of justification, the person to be justified;
that is, God considers no man's works, no man's duties of obedience, in
his justification, seeing we are justified "doorean tei outou chariti",--
"freely by his grace." And when God affirms expressly that he justifies
him who works not, and that freely by his grace, I cannot understand what
place our works or duties of obedience can have in our justification; for
why should we trouble ourselves to invent of what consideration they may
be in our justification before God, when he himself affirms that they are
of none at all? Neither are the words capable of any evading
interpretation. He that worketh not is he that worketh not, let men say
what they please, and distinguish as long as they will: and it is a
boldness not to be justified, for any to rise up in opposition unto such
express divine testimonies, however they may be harnessed with
philosophical notions and arguing; which are but as thorns and briers,
which the word of God will pass through and consume.

   But the apostle farther adds, in the description of the subject of
justification, that God "justifieth the ungodly." This is that expression
which has stirred up so much wrath amongst many, and on the account
whereof some seem to be much displeased with the apostle himself. If any
other person dare but say that God justifies the ungodly, he is
personally reflected on as one that by his doctrine would overthrow the
necessity of godliness, holiness, obedience, or good works; "for what
need can there be of any of them, if God justifies the ungodly?" Howbeit
this is a periphrasis of God, that he is "ho dikaioon ton asethe",--"he
that justifieth the ungodly." This is his prerogative and property; as
such will he be believed in and worshipped, which adds weight and
emphasis unto the expression; and we must not forego this testimony of
the Holy Ghost, let men be as angry as they please.

   "But the difference is about the meaning of the words." If so, it may
be allowed without mutual offense, though we should mistake their proper
sense. Only, it must be granted that God "justifieth the ungodly." "That
is," say some, "those who formerly were ungodly, not those who continue
ungodly when they are justified." And this is most true. All that are
justified were before ungodly; and all that are justified are at the same
instant made godly. But the question is, whether they are godly or
ungodly antecedently in any moment of time unto their justification? If
they are considered as godly, and are so indeed, then the apostle's words
are not true, that God justifieth the ungodly; for the contradictory
proposition is true, God justifieth none but the godly. For these
propositions, God justifieth the ungodly, and God justifieth none but the
godly, are contradictory; for here are expressly "katafasis" and
"apofasis antikeimenai", which is "antifasis".

   Wherefore, although in and with the justification of a sinner, he is
made godly,--for he is endowed with that faith which purifies the heart
and is a vital principle of all obedience, and the conscience is purged
from dead works by the blood of Christ,--yet antecedently unto this
justification he is ungodly and considered as ungodly, as one that works
not, as one whose duties and obedience contribute nothing unto his
justification. As he works not, all works are excluded from being the
"causa per quam;" and as he is ungodly, from being the "causa sine qua
non" of his justification.

   The qualification of the subject, or the means on the part of the
person to be justified, and whereby he becomes actually so to be, is
faith, or believing: "But believeth on him who justifieth the ungodly;"
that is, it is faith alone. For it is the faith of him who worketh not;
and not only so, but its especial object, God as justifying the ungodly,
is exclusive of the concomitance of any works whatever.

   This is faith alone, or it is impossible to express faith alone,
without the literal use of that word alone. But faith being asserted in
opposition unto all works of ours, "unto him that worketh not;" and its
especial nature declared in its especial object, God as "justifying the
ungodly,"that is, freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in
Christ Jesus;--no place is left for any works to make the least approach
towards our justification before God, under the covert of any distinction
whatever. And the nature of justifying faith is here also determined. It
is not a mere assent unto divine revelations; it is not such a firm
assent unto them as should cause us to yield obedience unto all the
precepts of the Scripture,--though these things are included in it; but
it is a believing on and trusting unto him that justified the ungodly,
through the mediation of Christ.

   Concerning this person, the apostle affirms that "his faith is counted
for righteousness;" that is, he is justified in the way and manner before
declared. But there is a difference about the sense of these words. Some
say the meaning of them is, that faith, as an act, a grace, a duty, or
work of ours, is so imputed. Others say that it is faith as it apprehends
Christ and his righteousness, which is properly imputed unto us, that is
intended. So faith, they say, justifieth, or is counted for righteousness
relatively, not properly, with respect unto its object; and so
acknowledge a trope in the words. And this is fiercely opposed, as though
they denied the express words of the Scripture, when yet they do but
interpret this expression, once only used, by many others, wherein the
same thing is declared. But those who are for the first sense, do all
affirm that faith here is to be taken as including obedience or works,
either as the form and essence of it, or as such necessary concomitants
as have the same influence with it into our justification, or are in the
same manner the condition of it. But as herein they admit also of a trope
in the words, which they so fiercely blame in others, so they give this
sense of the whole: "Unto him that worketh not, but believeth in him that
justifieth the ungodly, his faith and works are counted to him for
righteousness;" which is not only to deny what the apostle affirms, but
to assign unto him a plain contradiction.

   And I do a little marvel that any unprejudiced person should expound
this solitary expression in such a sense as is contradictory unto the
design of the apostle, the words of the same period, and the whole
ensuing context. For that which the apostle proposes unto confirmation,
which contains his whole design, is, that we are justified by the
righteousness which is of God by faith in the blood of Christ. That this
cannot be faith itself shall immediately be made evident. And in the
words of the text all works are excluded, if any words be sufficient to
exclude them; but faith absolutely, as a single grace, act, and duty of
ours, much more as it includes obedience in it, is a work,--and in the
latter sense, it is all works. And in the ensuing context he proves that
Abraham was not justified by works. But not to be justified by works, and
to be justified by some works,--as faith itself is a work, and if, as
such, it be imputed unto us for righteousness, we are justified by it as
such,--are contradictory. Wherefore, I shall oppose some few arguments
unto this feigned sense of the apostle's words:--

   1. To believe absolutely,--as faith is an act and duty of ours,-- and
works are not opposed, for faith is a work, an especial kind of working;
but faith, as we are justified by it, and works, or to work, are opposed:
"To him that worketh not, but believeth." So Gal.2:16; Eph.2:8,9.

   2. It is the righteousness of God that is imputed unto us; for we are
"made the righteousness of God in Christ," 2 Cor.5:21; "The righteousness
of God upon them that believe," Rom.3:21,22; but faith, absolutely
considered, is not the righteousness of God. "God imputeth unto us
righteousness without works," chap.4:6; but there is no intimation of a
double imputation, of two sorts of righteousnesses,--of the righteousness
of God, and that which is not so. Now faith, absolutely considered, is
not the righteousness of God; for,--

   (1.) That whereunto the righteousness of God is revealed, whereby we
believe and receive it, is not itself the righteousness of God; for
nothing can be the cause or means of itself;--but the righteousness of
God is "revealed unto faith," chap.1:17; and by it is it "received,"
chap.3:22; 5:11.

   (2.) Faith is not the righteousness of God which is by faith; but the
righteousness of God which is imputed unto us is "the righteousness of
God which is by faith," chap.3:22; Phil.3:9.

   (3.) That whereby the righteousness of God is to be sought, obtained,
and submitted unto, is not that righteousness itself; but such is faith,
Rom.9:30,31; 10:3,4.

   (4.) The righteousness which is imputed unto us is not our own
antecedently unto that imputation: "That I may be found in him, not
having mine own righteousness," Phil.3:9; but faith is a man's own: "Show
me thy faith, and I will show thee my faith," James 2:18.

   (5.) "God imputeth righteousness" unto us, Rom.4:6; and that
righteousness which God imputes unto us is the righteousness whereby we
are justified, for it is imputed unto us that we may be justified;--but
we are justified by the obedience and blood of Christ: "By the obedience
of one we are made righteous," chap.5:19; "Much more now being justified
by his blood," verse 9; "He has put away sin by the sacrifice of
himself," Heb.9:26; Isa.53:11, "By his knowledge shall my righteous
servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities." But faith is
neither the obedience nor the blood of Christ.

   (6.) Faith, as we said before, is our own; and that which is our own
may be imputed unto us. But the discourse of the apostle is about that
which is not our own antecedently unto imputation, but is made ours
thereby, as we have proved; for it is of grace. And the imputation unto
us of what is really our own antecedently unto that imputation, is not of
grace, in the sense of the apostle; for what is so imputed is imputed for
what it is, and nothing else. For that imputation is but the judgment of
God concerning the thing imputed, with respect unto them whose it is. So
the act of Pinehas was imputed unto him for righteousness. God judged it,
and declared it to be a righteous, rewardable act. Wherefore, if our
faith and obedience be imputed unto us, that imputation is only the
judgment of God that we are believers, and obedient. "The righteousness
of the righteous," saith the prophet, "shall be upon him, and the
wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him," Ezek.18:20. As the
wickedness of the wicked is upon him, or is imputed unto him; so the
righteousness of the righteous is upon him, or is imputed unto him. And
the wickedness of the wicked is on him, when God judges him wicked as his
works are; so is the righteousness of a man upon him, or imputed unto
him, when God judgeth of his righteousness as it is. Wherefore, if faith,
absolutely considered, be imputed unto us as it contains in itself, or as
it is accompanied with, works of obedience; then it is imputed unto us,
either for a perfect righteousness, which it is not, or for an imperfect
righteousness, which it is; or the imputation of it is the accounting of
that to be a perfect righteousness which is but imperfect. But none of
these can be affirmed:--

   [1.] It is not imputed unto us for a perfect righteousness, the
righteousness required by the law; for so it is not. Episcopius confesses
in his disputation, dispute.45, sect.7,8, that the righteousness which is
imputed unto us must be "absolutissima et perfectissima,"-- "most
absolute and most perfect." And thence he thus defines the imputation of
righteousness unto us,--namely, that it is, "gratiosa divinae mentis
aestimatio, qua credentem in Filium suum, eo loco reputat ac si perfecte
justus esset, ac legi et voluntati ejus per omnia semper paruisset". And
no man will pretend that faith is such a most absolute and most perfect
righteousness, as that by it the righteousness of the law should be
fulfilled in us, as it is by that righteousness which is imputed unto us.

   [2.] It is not imputed unto us for what it is,--an imperfect
righteousness; for, First, This would be of no advantage unto us; for we
cannot be justified before God by an imperfect righteousness, as is
evident in the prayer of the psalmist, Ps.143:2, "Enter not into judgment
with thy servant, for in thy sight no man living" (no servant of thine
who has the most perfect or highest measure of imperfect righteousness)
"shall be justified." Secondly, The imputation of any thing unto us that
was ours antecedently unto that imputation, for what it is, and no more,
is contrary unto the imputation described by the apostle; as has been
proved.

   [3.] This imputation pleaded for cannot be a judging of that to be a
perfect righteousness which is imperfect; for the judgment of God is
according to truth. But without judging it to be such, it cannot be
accepted as such. To accept of any thing, but only for what we judge it
to be, is to be deceived.

   Lastly, If faith, as a work, be imputed unto us, then it must be as a
work wrought in faith; for no other work is accepted with God. Then must
that faith also wherein it is wrought be imputed unto us; for that also
is faith and a good work. That, therefore, must have another faith from
whence it must proceed; and so "in infinitum."

   Many other things there are in the ensuing explication of the
justification of Abraham, the nature of his faith and his righteousness
before God, with the application of them unto all that do believe, which
may be justly pleaded unto the same purpose with those passages of the
context which we have insisted on; but if every testimony should be
pleaded which the Holy Ghost has given unto this truth, there would be no
end of writing. One thing more I shall observe, and put an end unto our
discourse on this chapter.

   Rom.4:6-8. The apostle pursues his argument to prove the freedom of
our justification by faith, without respect unto works, through the
imputation of righteousness, in the instance of pardon of sin, which
essentially belongs thereunto. And this he does by the testimony of the
psalmist, who places the blessedness of a man in the remission of sins.
His design is not thereby to declare the full nature of justification,
which he had done before, but only to prove the freedom of it from any
respect unto works in the instance of that essential part of it. "Even as
David also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth
righteousness without works," (which was the only thing he designed to
prove by this testimony), "saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are
forgiven." He describes their blessedness by it;--not that their whole
blessedness does consist therein, but this concurs unto it, wherein no
respect can possibly be had unto any works whatever. And he may justly
from hence describe the blessedness of a man, in that the imputation of
righteousness and the non-imputation of sin (both which the apostle
mentions distinctly), wherein his whole blessedness as unto justification
does consist, are inseparable. And because remission of sin is the first
part of justification, and the principal part of it, and has the
imputation of righteousness always accompanying it, the blessedness of a
man may be well described thereby; yea, whereas all spiritual blessings
go together in Christ, Eph.1:3, a man's blessedness may be described by
any of them. But yet the imputation of righteousness and the remission of
sin are not the same, no more than righteousness imputed and sin remitted
are the same. Nor does the apostle propose them as the same, but mentions
them distinctly, both being equally necessary unto our complete
justification, as has been proved.

   Rom.5:12-21. "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and
death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
(for until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when
there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over
them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression,
who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offense, so
also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many be dead;
much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man,
Jesus Christ, has abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that
sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but
the free gift is of many offenses unto justification. For if by one man's
offense death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of
grace, and of the gift of righteousness, shall reign in life by one,
Jesus Christ:) Therefore, as by the offense of one judgment came upon all
men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift
came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's
disobedience many were made sinners; so by the obedience of one shall
many be made righteous. Moreover, the law entered, that the offense might
abound: but where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: that as sin
has reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness
unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord."

   The apostle, chap.3:27, affirms that in this matter of justification
all "kauchesis", or "boasting," is excluded; but here, in the verse
foregoing, he grants a boasting or a "kauchema". "Ou monon de, alle kai
kauchoomenoi en tooi Theooi";--"And not only so, but we also glory in
God." He excludes boasting in ourselves, because there is nothing in us
to procure or promote our own justification. He allows it us in God,
because of the eminency and excellency of the way and means of our
justification which in his grace he has provided. And the "kauchema", or
"boasting" in God, here allowed us, has a peculiar respect unto what the
apostle had in prospect farther to discourse of. "Ou monon de",--"And not
only so," includes what he had principally treated of before concerning
our justification, so far as it consists in the pardon of sin; for
although he does suppose, yea, and mention, the imputation of
righteousness also unto us, yet principally he declares our justification
by the pardon of sin and our freedom from condemnation, whereby all
boasting in ourselves is excluded. But here he designs a farther
progress, as unto that whereon our glorying in God, on a right and title
freely given us unto eternal life, does depend. And this is the
imputation of the righteousness and obedience of Christ unto the
justification of life, or the reign of grace through righteousness unto
eternal life.

   Great complaints have been made by some concerning the obscurity of
the discourse of the apostle in this place, by reason of sundry ellipses,
antapodota, hyperbata, and other figures of speech, which either are or
are feigned to be therein. Howbeit, I cannot but think, that if men
acquainted with the common principles of Christian religion, and sensible
in themselves of the nature and guilt of our original apostasy from God,
would without prejudice read "tauten ten periochen tes Grafes",--"this
place of the Scripture," they will grant that the design of the apostle
is to prove, that as the sin of Adam was imputed unto all men unto
condemnation, so the righteousness or obedience of Christ is imputed unto
all that believe unto the justification of life. The sum of it is given
by Theodore, Dial. 3 "Vide, quomodo quae Christi sunt cum iis quae sunt
Adami conferantur, cum morbo medicina, cum vulnere emplastrum, cum
peccato justitia, cum execratione benedictio, cum condemnatione remissio,
cum transgressione obedientie, cum morte vita, cum inferis regnum,
Christus cum Adam, homo cum homine".

   The differences that are among interpreters about the exposition of
these words relate unto the use of some particles, prepositions, and the
dependence of one passage upon another; on none of which the confirmation
of the truth pleaded for does depend. But the plain design of the
apostle, and his express propositions, are such as, if men could but
acquiesce in them, might put an end unto this controversy.

   Socinus acknowledges that this place of Scripture does give, as he
speaks, the greatest occasion unto our opinion in this matter; for he
cannot deny but at least a great appearance of what we believe is
represented in the words of the apostle. He does, therefore, use his
utmost endeavour to wrest and deprave them; and yet, although most of his
artifices are since traduced into the annotations of others upon the
place, he himself produces nothing material but what is taken out of
Origen, and the comment of Pelagius on this epistle, which is extant in
the works of Jerome, and was urged before him by Erasmus. The substance
or what he pleads for is, that the actual transgression of Adam is not
imputed unto his posterity, nor a depraved nature from thence
communicated unto them; only, whereas he had incurred the penalty of
death, all that derive their nature from him in that condition are
rendered subject unto death also. And as for that corruption of nature
which is in us, or a proneness unto sin, it is not derived from Adam, but
is a habit contracted by many continued acts of our own. So also, on the
other hand, that the obedience or righteousness of Christ is not imputed
unto us; only when we make ourselves to become his children by our
obedience unto him,--he having obtained eternal life for himself by his
obedience unto God,--we are made partakers of the benefits thereof. This
is the substance of his long disputation on this subject, De Servatore,
lib.4 cap.6. But this is not to expound the words of the apostle, but
expressly to contradict them, as we shall see in the ensuing
consideration of them.

   I intend not an exposition of the whole discourse of the apostle, but
only of those passages in it which evident]y declare the way and manner
of our justification before God.

   A comparison is here proposed and pursued between the first Adam, by
whom sin was brought into the world, and the second Adam, by whom it is
taken away. And a comparison it is "ek tou enantiou",--of things
contrary; wherein there is a similitude in some things, and a
dissimilitude in others, both sorts illustrating the truth declared in
it. The general proposition of it is contained in verse 12: "As by one
man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed on
all men, for that all have sinned." The entrance of sin and punishment
into the world was by one man; and that by one sin, as he afterwards
declares: yet were they not confined unto the person of that one man, but
belonged equally unto all. This the apostle expresses, inverting the
order of the effect and cause. In the entrance of it he first mentions
the cause or sin, and then the effect or punishment: "By one man sin
entered into the world, and death by sin;" but in the application of it
unto all men, he expresses first the effect and then the cause: "Death
passed on all men, for that all have sinned." Death, on the first
entrance of sin, passed on all,--that is, all men became liable and
obnoxious unto it, as the punishment due to sin. All men that ever were,
are, or shall be, were not then existent in their own persons; but yet
were they all of them then, upon the first entrance of sin, made subject
to death, or liable unto punishment. They were so by virtue of divine
constitution, upon their federal existence in the one man that sinned.
And actually they became obnoxious in their own persons unto the sentence
of it upon their first natural existence, being born children of wrath.

   It is hence manifest what sin it is that the apostle intends,--namely,
the actual sin of Adam,--the one sin of that one common person, whilst he
was so. For although the corruption and depravation of our nature does
necessarily ensue thereon, in every one that is brought forth actually to
the world by natural generation; yet is it the guilt of Adam's actual sin
alone that rendered them all obnoxious unto death upon the first entrance
of sin into the world. So death entered by sin,--the guilt of it,
obnoxiousness unto it; and that with respect unto all men universally.

   Death here comprises the whole punishment due unto sin, be it what it
will, concerning which we need not here to dispute: "The wages of sin is
death," Rom.6:23, and nothing else. Whatever sin deserves in the justice
of God, whatever punishment God at any time appointed or threatened unto
it, it is comprised in death: "In the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt
die the death." This, therefore, the apostle lays down as the foundation
of his discourse, and of the comparison which he intends,--namely, that
in and by the actual sin of Adam, all men are made liable unto death, or
unto the whole punishment due unto sin; that is, the guilt of that sin is
imputed unto them. For nothing is intended by the imputation of sin unto
any, but the rendering them justly obnoxious unto the punishment due unto
that sin; as the not imputing of sin is the freeing of men from being
subject or liable unto punishment. And this sufficiently evidences the
vanity of the Pelagian gloss, that death passed upon all merely by virtue
of natural propagation from him who had deserved it, without any
imputation of the guilt of sin unto them; which is a contradiction unto
the plain words of the apostle. For it is the guilt of sin, and not
natural propagation, that he affirms to be the cause of death.

   Having mentioned sin and death, the one as the only cause of the
other, the guilt of sin of the punishment of death,--sin deserving
nothing but death, and death being due unto nothing but sin,--he declares
how all men universally became liable unto this punishment, or guilty of
death: "Eph'hooi pantes hemarton",--"In quo ones peccaverunt,"--"In whom
all have sinned." For it relates unto the one man that sinned, in whom
all sinned: which is evident from the effect thereof, inasmuch as "in him
all died," 1 Cor.15:22; or, as it is here, on his sin "death passed on
all men." And this is the evident sense of the words, "epi" being put for
"en" which is not unusual in the Scripture. See Matt.15:5; Rom.4:18; 5:2;
Phil.1:3; Heb.9:17. And it is often so used by the best writers in the
Greek tongue. So Hesiod, "Metron d'epi pasin ariston",--"Modus in omnibus
rebus optimus." So, "Eph' humin estin",--"In vobis situm est"; "Touto
eph' emoi keitai",--"Hoc in me situm est." And this reading of the words
is contended for by Austin against the Pelagians, rejecting their "eo
quad" or "propterea." But I shall not contend about the reading of the
words. It is the artifice of our adversaries to persuade men, that the
force of our argument to prove from hence the imputation of the sin of
Adam unto his posterity, does depend solely upon this interpretation of
these words, "eph' hooi", by "in whom." We shall, therefore, grant them
their desire, that they are better rendered by "eo quod," "propterea," or
"quatenus," --"inasmuch," "because." Only, we must say that here is a
reason given why "death passed on all men," inasmuch as "all have
sinned," that is, in that sin whereby death entered into the world.

   It is true, death, by virtue of the original constitution of the law,
is due unto every sin, whenever it is committed. But the present inquiry
is, how death passed at once on all men? How they came [to be] liable and
obnoxious unto it upon its first entrance by the actual sin of Adam,--
which cannot be by their own actual sin; yea, the apostle, in the next
verses, affirms that death passed on them also who never sinned actually,
or as Adam did, whose sin was actual. And if the actual sins of men, in
imitation of Adam's sin, were intended, then should men be made liable to
death before they had sinned; for death, upon its first entrance into the
world, passed on all men, before any one man had actually sinned but Adam
only. But that men should be liable unto death, which is nothing but the
punishment of sin, when they have not sinned, is an open contradiction.
For although God, by his sovereign power, might indict death on an
innocent creature, yet that an innocent creature should be guilty of
death is impossible: for to be guilty of death, is to have sinned.
Wherefore this expression, "Inasmuch as all have sinned," expressing the
desert and guilt of death then when sin and death first entered into the
world, no sin can be intended in it but the sin of Adam, and our interest
therein: "Eramus enim omnes ille unus homo"; and this can be no otherwise
but by the imputation of the guilt of that sin unto us, For the act of
Adam not being ours inherently and subjectively, we cannot be concerned
in its effect but by the imputation of its guilt; for the communication
of that unto us which is not inherent in us, is that which we intend by
imputation.

   This is the "protasis" of the intended collation; which I have
insisted the longer on, because the apostle lays in it the foundation of
all that he afterwards infers and asserts in the whole comparison. And
here, some say, there is an "anantapodaton" in his discourse; that is, he
lays down the proposition on the part of Adam, but does not show what
answers to it on the contrary in Christ. And Origin gives the reason of
the silence of the apostle herein,--namely, lest what is to be said
therein should be abused by any unto sloth and negligence. For whereas he
says "hoosper", "as" (which is a note of similitude) "by one man sin
entered into the world, and death by sin;" so the "apodosis", or
reddition, should be, "so by one righteousness entered into the world,
and life by righteousness."

   This he acknowledges to be the genuine filling up of the comparison,
but was not expressed by the apostle, lest men should abuse it unto
negligence or security, supposing that to be done already which should be
done afterwards. But as this plainly contradicts and everts most of what
he farther asserts in the exposition of the place, so the apostle
concealed not any truth upon such considerations. And as he plainly
expresses that which is here intimated, verse 19, so he shows how foolish
and wicked any such imaginations are, as suppose that any countenance is
given hereby unto any to indulge themselves in their sins.

   Some grant, therefore, that the apostle does conceal the expression of
what is ascribed unto Christ, in opposition unto what he had affirmed of
Adam and his sin, unto verse 19; but the truth is, it is sufficiently
included in the close of verse 19, where he affirms of Adam that, in
those things whereof he treats, he was "the figure of him that was to
come." For the way and manner whereby he introduced righteousness and
life, and communicated them unto men, answered the way and manner whereby
Adam introduced sin and death, which passed on all the world. Adam being
the figure of Christ, look how it was with him, with respect unto his
natural posterity, as unto sin and death; so it is with the Lord Christ,
the second Adam, and his spiritual posterity, with respect unto
righteousness and life. Hence we argue,--

   If the actual sin of Adam was so imputed unto all his posterity as to
be accounted their own sin unto condemnation, then is the actual
obedience of Christ, the second Adam, imputed unto all his spiritual seed
(that is, unto all believers) unto justification. I shall not here
farther press this argument, because the ground of it will occur unto us
afterwards.

   The two next verses, containing an objection and an answer returned
unto it, wherein we have no immediate concernment, I shall pass by.

   Verses 15,16. The apostle proceeds to explain his comparison in those
things wherein there is a dissimilitude between the comparates:--

   "But not as the offense, so also is the free gift. For if through the
offense of one many be dead; much more the grace of God, and the gift by
grace, by one man, Jesus Christ, has abounded unto many."

   The opposition is between "paraptooma" on the one hand, and "charisma"
on the other,--between which a dissimilitude is asserted, not as unto
their opposite effects of death and life, but only as unto the degrees of
their efficacy, with respect unto those effects. "Paraptooma", the
offense, the fall, the sin, the transgression,--that is, "tou henos
parako-e", "the disobedience of one," verse 19. Hence the first sin of
Adam is generally called "the fall,"--"to paraptooma". That which is
opposed hereunto is "to charisma"--"Donum, donum gratuitum; beneficium,
id quod Deus gratificatur"; that is, "Charis tou Theou, kai doorea en
chariti tei tou henos anthroopou Iesou Christou", as it is immediately
explained, "The grace of God, and the free gift by grace, through Jesus
Christ." Wherefore, although this word, in the next verse, does precisely
signify the righteousness of Christ, yet here it comprehends all the
causes of our justification, in opposition unto the fall of Adam, and the
entrance of sin thereby.

   The consequent and effect "tou paraptoomatos",--"of the offense," the
fall,--is, that "many be dead." No more is here intended by "many," but
only that the effects of that one offense were not confined unto one; and
if we inquire who or how many those many are, the apostle tells us that
they are all men universally; that is, all the posterity of Adam. By this
one offense, because they all sinned, therein they are all dead; that is,
rendered obnoxious and liable unto death, as the punishment due unto that
one offense. And hence also it appears how vain it is to wrest those
words of verse 12, "Inasmuch as all have sinned," unto any other sin but
the first sin in Adam, seeing it is given as the reason why death passed
on them; it being here plainly affirmed "that they are dead," or that
death passed on them by that one offense.

   The efficacy "tou charismatos",--"of the free gift," opposed hereunto,
is expressed, as that which abounded much more. Besides the thing itself
asserted, which is plain and evident, the apostle seems to me to argue
the equity of our justification by grace, through the obedience of
Christ, by comparing it with the condemnation that befell us by the sin
and disobedience of Adam. For if it were just, meet, and equal, that all
men should be made subject unto condemnation for the sin of Adam; it is
much more so, that those who believe should be justified by the obedience
of Christ, through the grace and free donation of God. But wherein, in
particular, the gift by grace abounded unto many, above the efficacy of
the fall to condemn, he declares afterwards. And that whereby we are
freed from condemnation, more eminently than we are made obnoxious unto
it by the fall and sin of Adam, by that alone we are justified before
God. But this is by the grace of God, and the gift by grace, through
Jesus Christ alone; which we plead for, verse 16. Another difference
between the comparates is expressed, or rather the instance is given in
particular of the dissimilitude asserted in general before:--

   "And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the
judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many
offenses unto justification."

   "Di' henos hamartesantos", "By one that sinned," is the same with "di'
henos paraptoomatos", "by one sin," one offense, the one sin of that man.
"Krima", we render "judgment." Most interpreters do it by "reatus,"
"guilt," or "crimen," which is derived from it. So "mishpat", "judicium,"
is used in the Hebrew for guilt: "mishpat-mawet la'ish hazeh", Jer.26:11,
"The judgment of death is to this man, this man is guilty of death, has
deserved to die." First, therefore, there was "paraptooma", the sin, the
fall, "tou henos hamartesantos", of one man that sinned; it was his
actual sin alone. Thence followed "krima", "reatus," "guilt;" this was
common unto all. In and by that one sin, guilt came upon all. And the end
hereof, that which it rendered men obnoxious unto, is "katakrima",--
"condemnation," guilt unto condemnation. And this guilt unto condemnation
which came upon all, was "ex henos",--of one person, or sin. This is the
order of things on the part of Adam:--(1.) "Paraptooma", the one sin;
(2.) "Krima", the guilt that thereon ensued unto all; (3.) "Katachrima",
the condemnation which that guilt deserved. And their "antitheta," or
opposites, in the second Adam are:--(1.) "Charisma", the free donation of
God; (2.) "Doorema", the gift of grace itself, or the righteousness of
Christ; (3.) "Dikaiooma", or "dikaioosis dzooes", "justification of
life." But yet though the apostle does thus distinguish these things, to
illustrate his comparison and opposition, that which he intends by them
all is the righteousness and obedience of Christ, as he declares, verses
18,19. This, in the matter of our justification, he calls,--(1.)
"Charisma", with respect unto the free, gratuitous grant of it by the
grace of God, "Doorea tes charitos", and (2.) "Doorema", with respect
unto us who receive it,--a free gift it is unto us; and (3.) "Dikaiooma",
with respect unto its effect of making us righteous.

   Whereas, therefore, by the sin of Adam imputed unto them, guilt came
on all men unto condemnation, we must inquire wherein the free gift was
otherwise: "Not as by one that sinned, so was the gift " And it was so in
two things: for,--1. Condemnation came upon all by one offence; but being
under the guilt of that one offense, we contract the guilt of many more
innumerable. Wherefore, if the free gift had respect only unto that one
offense, and intended itself no farther, we could not be delivered;
wherefore it is said to be "of many offenses," that is, of all our sins
and trespasses whatever. 2. Adam, and all his posterity in him, were in a
state of acceptation with God, and placed in a way of obtaining eternal
life and blessedness, wherein God himself would have been their reward.
In this estate, by the entrance of sin, they lost the favour of God, and
incurred the guilt of death or condemnation, for they are the same. But
they lost not an immediate right and title unto life and blessedness; for
this they had not, nor could have before the course of obedience
prescribed unto them was accomplished. That, therefore, which came upon
all by the one offense, was the loss of God's favour in the approbation
of their present state, and the judgment or guilt of death and
condemnation. But an immediate right unto eternal life, by that one sin
was not lost. The free gift is not so: for as by it we are freed, not
only from one sin, but from all our sins, so also by it we have a right
and title unto eternal life; for therein, "grace reigns through
righteousness unto eternal life," verse 21.

   The same truth is farther explained and confirmed, verse 17, "For if
by one man's offense death reigned by one; much more they which receive
abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness, shall reign in life
by one, Jesus Christ." The design of the apostle having been sufficiently
manifested in our observations on the former verses, I shall from this
only observe those things which more immediately concern our present
subject. And,--

   1. It is worth observation with what variety of expressions the
apostle sets forth the grace of God in the justification of believers:
"Dikaiooma, doorema, charis, charisma, perisseia charitos, doorea tes
dikaiosunes". Nothing is omitted that may any way express the freedom,
sufficiency, and efficacy of grace unto that end. And although these
terms seem some of them to be coincident in their signification, and to
be used by him promiscuously, yet do they every one include something
that is peculiar, and all of them set forth the whole work of grace.
"Dikaiooma" seems to me to be used in this argument for "dikaiologema",
which is the foundation of a cause in trial, the matter pleaded, whereon
the person tried is to be acquitted and justified; and this is the
righteousness of Christ, "of one." "Doorema", or a free donation, is
exclusive of all desert and conditions on our part who do receive it; and
it is that whereby we are freed from condemnation, and have a right unto
the justification of life. "Charis" is the free grace and favour of God,
which is the original or efficient cause of our justification, as was
declared, chap.3:24. "Charisma" has been explained before. "Perisseia
charitos",--"The abundance of grace,"--is added to secure believers of
the certainty of the effect. It is that whereunto nothing is wanting unto
our justification. "Doorea tes dikaiosunes" expresses the free grant of
that righteousness which is imputed unto us unto the justification of
life, afterward called "the obedience of Christ." Be men as wise and
learned as they please, it becomes us all to learn to think and speak of
these divine mysteries from this blessed apostle, who knew them better
than we all, and, besides, wrote by divine inspiration.

   And it is marvelous unto me how men can break through the face that he
has made about the grace of God and obedience of Christ, in the work of
our justification before God, to introduce their own works of obedience,
and to find a place for them therein. But the design of Paul and some
men, in declaring this point of our justification before God, seems to be
very opposite and contrary. His whole discourse is concerning the grace
of God, the death, blood, and obedience of Christ, as if he could never
sufficiently satisfy himself in the setting out and declaration of them,
without the least mention of any works or duties of our own, or the least
intimation of any use that they are of herein. But all their pleas are
for their own works and duties; and they have invented as many terms to
set them out by as the Holy Ghost has used for the expression and
declaration of the grace of God. Instead of the words of wisdom before
mentioned, which the Holy Ghost has taught, wherewith he fills up his
discourse, theirs are filled with conditions, preparatory dispositions,
merits, causes, and I know not what trappings for our own works. For my
part I shall choose rather to learn of him, and accommodate my
conceptions and expressions of gospel mysteries, and of this in especial
concerning our justification, unto his who cannot deceive me, than trust
to any other conduct, how specious soever its pretences may be.

   2. It is plain in this verse that no more is required of any one unto
justification, but that he receive the "abundance of grace and the gift
of righteousness;" for this is the description that the apostle gives of
those that are justified, as unto any thing that on their part is
required. And as this excludes all works of righteousness which we do,--
for by none of them do we receive the abundance of grace, and the gift of
righteousness,--so it does also the imputation of faith itself unto our
justification, as it is an act and duty of our own: for faith is that
whereby we receive the gift of righteousness by which we are justified.
For it will not be denied but that we are justified by the gift of
righteousness, or the righteousness which is given unto us; for by it
have we right and title unto life. But our faith is not this gift; for
that which receives, and that which is received, are not the same.

   3. Where there is "perisseia charitos", and "haris
huperpepisseuousa",--"abounding grace," "superabounding grace," exerted
in our justification, no more is required thereunto; for how can it be
said to abound, yea, to superabound, not only to the freeing of us from
condemnation, but the giving of us a title unto life, if in any thing it
is to be supplied and eked out by works and duties of our own? The things
intended do fill up these expressions, although to some they are but an
empty noise.

   4. There is a gift of righteousness required unto our justification,
which all must receive who are to be justified, and all are justified who
do receive it; for they that re