In particular, the constitution or appointment of the covenant of free grace, for the recovery and bringing home unto God of fallen man, hath immediate depend- ence thereon; I mean in that way of dependence which their order gives unto them. I cannot assent to what Mr Baxter hath asserted in this mattei', thes, 14, expl. p. 90. " The satisfaction of Christ," saith he, "to the law goes before the new covenant, though not in regard of its payment, which was in the fulness of time, yet in undertaking, acceptance, and efficacy: there could be no treating on new terms until the old obligation was satisfied and svispended."
Had he attempted the proof of this assertion, perhaps he woixld have found it a more difficvdt undertaking than barely to affirm it. Some few reasons to the con- trary that present themselves I shall briefly set down: —
1. Christ himself, with his whole satisfaction and merit, is included in the cove- nant ; therefore, his satisfaction is not antecedent to the covenant. The first ap- peareth, in that all promises of pardoning mercy are in and of this new covenant, Heb. viii. 10-12; but now, in them, as the foundation of that mercy, is Christ himself, with his satisfaction, comprised. Gen. iii. 15; Isa. ix. 6, 7.
2. He who in all that he is, as made unto us, was the Mediator of the new covenant, and whose merit and satisfaction, in all that they are, are appointed for the pi'ocuring the mercies of the new covenant, his • satisfaction is not antecedent to the covenant, Heb. vii. 22, viii, 6, etc
3. The constitution of the new covenant, as it is in the purpose of God, is the rise and fountain of giving Christ with his satisfaction for us. It is in the pvu-pose of
456 OF THE DEATH OF CIIKIST.
God to save us, thrrjugh faith, by pai-rloning mercy: in the pursuit of that design, and for tlie praise of that glorious grace, is Christ given, John iii. IG; Rom. viii. 32. Or thus:—
4. If the designation of that way of hfe and salvation which is administered by the gospel be antecedent to the satisfaction of Christ, then the satisfaction of Christ is not antecedent to the new covenant ; for nothing can be before and after the same thing Understand the designation of the way of life, and the satisfac- tion of Christ, in the same order of decree or execution ; now the supposal is manifest, — the satisfaction of Clirist being appointed as the means of accomplishing that way of life.
If Mr B.ixter intendeth those latter words, " There could be no treating on new terms before the old obligation was satisfied or suspended," as a proof of his former assertion, he will fail in his intendment, as I suppose; for, —
1. Treating on new terms denoteth either consilium ineundi foederis, or cxe- quendi. If the first, it is nothing but the purpose of God to save his elect by par- doning mercy, for the praise of his glorious grace. This is wholly antecedent to any etiiciency of the death and satisfaction of Christ, as being of mere and absolute grace, Jer. xxxi. 3; Heb. viii. 7, 8. If the latter be intended, or the actual taking of sinners into covenant, by working an accejjtance of it upon their spirits, and obedience to the condition of it in their hearts, then, though the satisfaction of Christ be an antecedent hei-eunto, yet it is not thence antecedent to the new cove- nant; for the new covenant, and taking into covenant, are distinct.
This, then, being assigned unto God, after our manner of apprehension, the next inquiry is into the state and condition of those persons who are the peculiar object of the act of God's will before described, in reference thei-eunto, antece- daneous to all consideration of the death of Christ, and all efficacy thereof.
The Scripture, speaking of them in this condition, saith that they are " beloved," Eom. ix. 13, xi. 28; "elected," Eph. i. 4; "ordained to eternal life," Acts xiii. 48 : 2 'Ihess. ii. 13. Whether only the eternal actings of the will of God towards them [be intended], or also their own change, either actual, in respect of real state and condition, or relative, in reference to the purpose of God, is not certainly evident. Hereunto, then, I propose these two things : —
1. By the eternal love, purpose, and act of God's will towards them that shall be saved (who are so from thence), they are not actually changed from that con- dition which i.s common to them with all the sons of men after the fall.
2. By virtue of that love alone, they have not so much as personal right unto any of those things which are the proper effects of that love, and which it pro- duceth in due season, bescemingly to the wisdom and justice of God.
llhther of these assertions shall be bi'iefly proved.
I. For the first, it is manifest, — «
(1.) From the act of God's will, which to this love is contradistinct. What change is wrought in the loved or elected by the purpose of God according to election, an answerable change must be wrought in the hated and appointed to condemnation by the decree of reprobation. Now, that tliis should really alter the condition of men, and actually dispose them under the consequences of that purpose, cannot be granted.