304 (314)
Chapter 25
The Imputation of Faith itself not proved
from
Romans 4
The
main, if not only ground, whereupon our adversaries build their assertion of
the imputation of our act of believing, is Romans 4, where they tell us, the
Apostle doth frequently and expressly say, that faith is imputed unto
righteousness. We must therefore, in order to vindicate the truth,
vindicate this place from their corrupt glosses; and to this end we shall first
show that that cannot be the meaning of the Apostle in this place, which our
adversaries contend for. Next we shall examine what they say to enforce their
exposition of the place.
That
the meaning of the Apostle in Romans 4, where it is said, Abraham believed
God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness: and afterward, his
faith is counted for righteousness, and faith was counted to Abraham for
righteousness, &c., is not that Abraham’s act of believing was
accounted the righteousness whereupon he was accepted, and was imputed unto him
as a righteousness in order to his justification; and consequently, that the
act of believing is now imputed to believers for their righteousness, as said
Servetus, Socinus and his followers, Arminius and his followers, Papists, and
others; that, I say, this is not the true meaning of the place, may appear from
these particulars.
1. If
the act of believing be accounted a righteousness, it
must either be accounted a perfect righteousness, or an imperfect
righteousness: If it be accounted for an imperfect righteousness, no man can
thereupon be justified;
305 (315)
But Paul is speaking of a righteousness that was
accounted to Abraham the father of the faithful, in order to justification, and
that behooved to be a perfect righteousness; for all his works, wherein was an
imperfect righteousness, were rejected: It cannot be accounted for a perfect
righteousness, because then it should be accounted to be what it is not, and
this accounting being an act of God’s judgment, it would follow, that the
judgment of God, were not according to truth; contrary to Romans 2: 2. The
reason is, because our faith is not perfect in itself, there being much dross
intermixed, and many degrees wanting in it: far less can it be a perfect
righteousness, seeing a perfect righteousness must comprehend full obedience to
the whole law of God.
2. The
imputation, whereof the Apostle speaks, is of something to be made the believers,
by the imputation of God, which the believer had not before. But this cannot be
faith, or the work of believing, because faith is ours before this imputation;
for Abraham believed God, and then followed this imputation; and in verse 24 it
is said, that it (to wit, some other thing, than the act of believing),
properly taken, that is imputed, or accounted here.
3.
Faith being antecedent to this imputation, if the act of believing be imputed,
the word impute, or account here, must not signify to bestow,
grant or reckon upon their score; but simply to esteem, judge or
repute: and thus faith, or the act of believing shall be in a believer, and yet
not be a righteousness, till God repute it to be so: But when God esteems,
judges, or reputes anything to be in us, he doth not change it, nor make it
something, that it was not before; but judges it to be, what it is indeed, for
his judgment is according to truth,
Romans 2: 2.
4. This
sense and gloss is quite opposite unto, and inconsistent with the Apostle’s
main scope, in the first part of that Epistle, which is to prove, that
righteousness is now revealed from faith to faith, Romans 1: 17, and that we
are not justified by the works of the law, but freely by grace, through the
redemption that is in Jesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be a
propitiation through faith in his blood, Romans 3: 24, 25. And therefore not
through the imputation of faith, the act of believing, or any work of
righteousness, which we have done: for that should not exclude boasting, or
glorying; but through the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, received
by faith.
5. That
which was accounted to Abraham for righteousness, did exclude all works, and
that to the end that all ground of boasting, even before men, might be taken
away, verses 2 and 3. Therefore faith as a work, or
the act of believing cannot be that which is here said to be reckoned or
accounted to Abraham for righteousness: for this is a work, and being made the
ground and formal objective cause of justification, cannot but give ground of
glorying before men.
6. This
gloss makes the Apostle’s discourse wholly incoherent; for he says in verses 4
and 5, Now to him, that worketh, is the reward not reckoned of grace,
306 (316)
but of debt: but to him, that worketh not, but believeth
on him, that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Now if faith, properly taken, be imputed, then the
reckoning shall be of just debt: for to reckon a man righteous, who is
righteous antecedent to that act of accounting, is no act of grace, but of just
debt: but faith being accounted for righteousness is an act of grace, and
therefore it must be the object of faith, or the righteousness that faith lays
hold on, that is here said to be counted upon the believer’s score; and this
indeed is no act of just debt, but of grace.
7.
Again, as was said above, if faith properly taken, or
the act of believing be imputed for righteousness, God should not be the
justifier of the ungodly; nor could faith act upon God, as such, with truth. And
yet the Apostle tells us here expressly, that faith acts upon God, as one that
justifies the ungodly. He who has a righteousness in himself is no ungodly man;
and God justifying a righteous man; could not be said to justify the ungodly.
But if we take faith here, for the object of faith, or for the righteousness of
Christ, which faith flees unto, and lays hold on, all is clear and harmonious; for
then that man is not a worker, but believes, and he believes on God, that
justifies the ungodly, that is one, that has no righteousness in himself, but
must have it elsewhere; even imputed to him, and bestowed upon him, through
faith; and when he thus believes, or lays hold on Christ’s righteousness, this
righteousness, which by faith he leans to, is counted on his score for
righteousness, and he is thereupon justified.
8.
Leaving what was formerly adduced against this gloss from verses 6, 7 and 8, we
shall see what other passages of this same chapter will say against it. The
faith that was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness, when he was in
uncircumcision, verses 9 and 10, is the same with the righteousness of faith,
which he had, being uncircumcised, verse 11. But this righteousness of faith is
not his act of believing, nor faith taken properly, as an act of obedience; but
the righteousness of the promised seed of the woman, in whom all nations of the
earth should be blessed, embraced by faith: for it is this, and not the mere
act of believing, that was sealed by the sign of circumcision, verse 11. For
this sacrament was a seal of the covenant; and we know, sacraments seal the
whole covenant, and all the promises thereof, to such as believe; and never
seal our faith, or the like, to be our righteousness.
9. The
same, that was imputed to Abraham for righteousness will be imputed to all
believers, verse 11. But that is not the pure act of believing, for Abraham’s
act of believing was a strong act, and is declared and explained to be such,
but every believer, who yet must be justified, hath not such a strong act of
faith, as Abraham had: and we cannot say, that some are less, and some are more
justified, because the faith of some is weak, and the faith of others is
strong: and yet this must be said, if the act of believing be imputed for a
righteousness, for the righteousness of one shall be greater than the
righteousness of another: and their justification must hold correspondence with
the ground thereof.
307 (317)
10.
That which was imputed to Abraham, and will be imputed to all believers for a righteousness, verse 11, must be a righteousness which
such have imputed unto them, who believe. For it is added, that he might be
the father of all them hat believe, though they be not circumcised, that
righteousness might be imputed unto them also: Abraham had righteousness
imputed to him, or reckoned upon his score, through faith, while he was
uncircumcised, that he might be the father of believers, among the Gentiles, to
whom also, when they believe, a righteousness will be imputed, as it was to
father Abraham.
11. It
is again called in verse 13, the righteousness of faith, and through it,
he says the promise was to Abraham, and to his seed: but the promise is not
through faith, as an act of virtue and obedience in us; for then it should be
through the law; but as the promise was made upon the account of the righteousness
of the promised seed, (our faith cannot be said to procure, or purchase such a
promise) so its application is by faith, laying hold on and gripping to that
righteousness.
12. If
faith properly taken were imputed, it should be made void, and the promise of
none effect, and they that are of the law should be heirs, for faith taken
properly, for the act of believing, belongs to the law: and when it is made our
righteousness, it is opposite to the free promise; for what is promised or
given upon the account of righteousness, or anything within us, is not a free
and gracious promise: And when a free and gracious promise is taken away, all
the right use of faith is taken away; and so faith is made void; for the very
essence of justifying faith lies in looking to, laying hold on, and leaning to
a frees and gracious promise.
13. The
Apostle in verse 15 proves that they who are of the law cannot be heirs; and
consequently that faith, or the act of believing cannot be imputed for
righteousness, as it is our act, done in obedience to the law; by this reason,
because the law works wrath, &c. And this also makes against the
imputation of faith, properly taken, because that is an act of obedience to the
law, and cannot become our righteousness, being imperfect, and consequently not
conformed to the law, which requires perfection in all duties, or otherwise
threatens wrath. And if any shall deny this of faith, viz. that it belongs to
the law, they must say, that there is no law for it; and consequently that not
to believe is no sin, for the Apostle adds, where no
law is, there is no transgression.
14. The
ground of the free promise is that which must be imputed, and laid hold on by
faith: but that cannot be faith properly taken, as our act. For then the
promise should not be of grace, as it is expressly said to be in verse 16. Nor
should it be sure, if it depended upon our faith, and not upon that, which
faith lays hold on.
These things,
beside what was mentioned before from this same chapter, verses 6, 7, 8, 23,
24, may satisfy us in this matter, and sufficiently evince that it is not the
Apostle’s meaning, that faith, properly taken, as our act, or our act of
believing, is imputed unto righteousness; but that the object of faith or the
righteousness of Christ laid hold on, and applied
308 (318)
by faith is that righteousness which is reckoned upon
the believer’s score.
Let us
now, in the next place, see what the adversaries say to make us believe that
Paul says in Romans 4 that our very act of believing is imputed to us for
righteousness: and that thus the Apostle must be understood, and not as meaning
the object of faith or the righteousness of Christ. The forecited author John
Goodwine in his Justific. Part 1, chapter
2, adduces some grounds for his gloss, which must be examined.
His
first ground is the letter of the Scripture, that speaks it once and twice
yea a third and a fourth time, verses 3, 9, 22, 23, 24. Certainly, says he,
there is not any truth in religion, nor any article of
the Christian belief, that can boast of the letter of the Scripture, more full,
express, and pregnant for it. Answer: We find it only twice said, in
express terms, that faith is counted for righteousness verse 5, and
again in verse 9 that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
It is then too widely spoken, when he says, that there is not any truth in Religion,
nor any article of the Christian faith, that can boast of more full, express
and pregnant letter of Scripture; yea even, though it were as oft and as
express as he alleges: but we must let many such confident expressions pass
with him. (2.) The question is not touching the letter, or the words; but the
true meaning: And if a truth be but once delivered, in the Scriptures, it is
sufficient to command our faith; but words never so oft repeated, when
corruptly glossed, yield no foundation to faith. We know, what Papists say of
these words, This is my body, which with
them is as full, express and pregnant a proof of their dream; as this passage
of Paul’s is of our adversaries fancies. And we know what Arians say of these
words, My Father is greater than I: and yet their false glosses cannot
be embraced for truths, let them boast of express Scriptures, never so much.
And what error I pray, or heresy is it, that doth not
pretend to the like? Let us see his next ground.
2. Says
he, The scope of the place rejoices in the
interpretation given. I grant indeed, that this is a good rule of
interpreting Scripture; for it is as a sure thread to lead us through many
labyrinths: But, which is the misery, many imagine that to be the scope of the
place, which is not so indeed; and thus perverting and mistaking the scope,
they must needs pervert all. Yet let us see, how he
would make the scope contribute to his notions. The Apostle’s main drift, (says
he,) was to hedge up with thorns that false way of justification, which lay
through works and legal performances; and withal to open and discover the true
way of justification, that is, to make known what they must do, and what God
requires of them to their justification; and that is (as John 6: 28, 29) faith
or to believe in the proper and formal signification, and not the righteousness
of Christ, this he required of Christ himself, he requires our faith in Christ
himself, and not in his righteousness. Answer: Paul’s scope is indeed to
hedge up all justification by the law, or by the works thereof, in
subordination to this other of showing that in the Gospel, the righteousness of
God is revealed from faith to faith, Romans 1: 17. And therefore he cannot
speak, for the imputation of faith, in its proper and formal signification; for
that is a work, commanded
309 (319)
by the Law of God; and the imputation thereof is
expressly alleged by our adversaries, to shoot out the righteousness of God,
which is revealed from faith to faith. (2.) To say, that the Apostle here only
requires faith in Christ, and not faith in his righteousness, in order to
justification, is either to divide Christ and his righteousness, or to give us
an historical faith, instead of justifying faith; that is such a faith in
Christ as is the faith of any other truth revealed in the Scriptures, such as
the creation of the world: and this is indeed to make a fundamental alteration
in the Gospel covenant and to destroy the true nature of justifying faith. (3.)
It is true, the Apostle is withal showing what we must do, in order to our
justification; but this in no way impeaches the interest of Christ’s
righteousness, as the formal ground of the justification of the ungodly; but
rather establishes it: for he shows, that we are not now justified by our doing,
or working, but by the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by
faith. (4.) Though God does not require of us the performance of the
righteousness of Christ; yet he requires of us that we lay hold thereupon, and
be covered therewith by faith, that under that robe, we may appear before our
judge; for to this end, is Christ made of God unto us righteousness, and
is become the Lord our Righteousness, I Corinthians 1: 30, Jeremiah 23:
6. And he requires of us, that we renounce all our own righteousness in this
affair, and acknowledge the righteousness of Christ as the only righteousness,
upon which we are to be justified, and therefore he wills us to say that in
the Lord have we Righteousness, Isaiah 45: 24. He is pleased to add, Therefore
for Paul to have said, that the righteousness of Christ should be imputed unto
them, had been quite beside his scope. Why so? His telling them what was
required of themselves, makes nothing against this, but does rather confirm it;
for when faith is pressed upon us, it is clearly supposed that the
righteousness of Christ is imputed, this being the peculiar work of faith, as
justifying, to bring in and put on Christ’s righteousness: and so, where our
redemption or justification by Christ is mentioned, faith (though it be not
expressly mentioned) is to be understood, as the mean or instrument, whereby
the same is applied to us; as also the redemption and righteousness of Christ
is to be understood, where justification by faith is only expressed: and as
sometimes we find both expressly mentioned; so both are most emphatically
comprehended and included, in that expression, now under consideration. Such a
glorious and firm connection is betwixt all these causes of our justification, and such a beautiful harmony of grace, that
as they cannot be separated, so the deforming, misplacing, or any way altering
of any one piece thereof, destroys the harmony, and darkens the beauty of the
whole.
In the
third place he argues against faith being taken tropically or metonymically and
to this end adduces these considerations. 1. It is not likely that the
Apostle, in this great and weighty point, should time after time, in one place
after another, without ever explaining himself, throughout the whole
disputation, use such a harsh and uncouth expression, or figure of speech, as is
not to be found in all his writing beside, nor in all
the Scriptures. Answer: Figurative
310 (320)
expressions are neither harsh in themselves, being
rather emphatically explicative, and more forcible upon the understanding, as
to the uptaking of these mysteries; nor are they strange and uncouth to the
Apostle, even in this matter, as might be abundantly evinced, almost as to
every expression, used in this matter, or at least, as to such expressions as
are about the main parts thereof: Let any read Paul’s writings on this subject,
here, and his epistle to the Galatians, and he shall find this true, almost in
every chapter. But it should satisfy us, that the Holy Ghost hath thought it
fit, to express the matter thus; and that to prevent mistakes, he hath given
both here and elsewhere, abundance of clear, plain, and down right expressions,
for a supply, as hath been shown above, so as none may mistake, but such as
will willfully step aside to follow their own ways: And it is not fair for
such, to object this, who, of all others, make the Scriptures to speak most
figuratively and tropically, when they have a mind to evade the dint of our
arguments from Scripture; of which very many instances might be adduced. It
cannot but seem strange to any, who hath read the Scriptures with attention, to
hear one with such confidence saying, that the naming of the act for the object
is such a harsh and uncouth expression and figure of speech, as is not to be
found in all the Scriptures again; when the same man hereafter cannot but
confess that Hope is often put for the thing hoped for, and is manifest
from Romans 8: 24, Colossians 1: 5, 27, and elsewhere, and also faith put for
Christ, Galatians 3: 23 twice and verse 25 once. This putting the object for
the act is a known and common Hebraism.
His 2nd
consideration is this: It is evident (says he) that that faith, or
believing, which verse 3 said to be imputed to Abraham for righteousness, is
opposed to works or working, verse 5. Now between faith properly taken and
works, and so between believing and working, there is a constant opposition:
but between the active obedience of Christ and works, there is no opposition.
Answer: It is most true, that in the matter of justification, believing is
opposed to working, and that constantly; and therefore he is concerned to look
to it, who will have us considering faith here only in such a way, as it cannot
be opposed to, but every way agree with works, as one of them. (2.) The
opposition betwixt our righteousness, consisting in works which we do, and the
Surety-Righteousness of Christ, consisting, not in his active obedience only,
(as he mistakenly supposes all along,) but in both active and passive
obedience, whereby he gave full satisfaction to the law, in all its demands, is
so palpable, that it cannot be well dissembled, far less denied.
His 3rd
consideration is, that it is said in verse 5, ‘His faith is imputed to him,’
where it is evident, that that faith (whatsoever we understand by it) which is
imputed for righteousness is His, that is, somewhat that truly and properly may
be called his, before such imputation be made unto him. Now it cannot be said
of the righteousness of Christ, that that is any man’s, before the imputation
of it be made unto him: But faith properly taken is the believer’s, before it
be imputed, at least in order of nature, if not of time. Answer: The words
of verse 5 are, His faith is counted for, or
unto righteousness. And so whatever be understood
by faith, it may in some respect, at least, in order of nature be his, before
it be
311 (321)
counted for, or unto, righteousness, or reckoned upon
his score; yea it must so be, that it may rightly be reckoned on his score: and
this is clear of the righteousness of
Christ, which becomes the believer’s by faith, and is given to him, and so made
his, by virtue of his union with Christ through faith: His mistake lies here,
that he takes these words counted for righteousness, to be every way the
same with imputing to or bestowing upon a person; while as the
formal difference is manifest, though the one includes the other, and
accounting unto righteousness doth in this matter, presuppose the imputation or
bestowing of that which is counted to such an end. Further, why may not his
faith, denote the object of his faith, as our hope, or our love may denote the
object of our hope and love? And whence then shall there any necessity arise to
say, that that object shall be truly and properly called his before the
imputation of it be made unto him, taking this imputation for bestowing, as he
seems here to do? But if imputation be taken for counting on their score it
presupposes their interest in the same, prior in order to nature, (as is said)
and that most manifestly.
In the
fourth place he says, Though we should grant a trope in this place, and by
faith, its object should be meant: Yet it will not follow, that the
righteousness of Christ should be here said to be imputed, but either God
himself, or the promise of God, for it was God he believed, verse 3. Answer:
In that promise made to Abraham, and which he believed, the sum of the Gospel
was comprehended, as Paul himself teaches us, Galatians 3: 8. And this promise
was a bundle of promises, and therefore is called promises, in the
plural number Galatians 3: 16, 21, and was the Covenant confirmed of God in
Christ, verse 17, and the inheritance verse 18 and life
verse 21, which cannot be had without a righteousness, ibid. even the
righteousness of faith that was to come, to wit of Christ, verse 22, 23, 24,
who is the only Mediator, verse 20, and is there expressly called Christ and
was to be revealed. Hence they, that have believed in Christ Jesus and are
baptized into Christ, and have put on Christ, and are in Christ, and are Christ’s,
are Abraham’s seed, Abraham must have been such himself; that Father and
Children may be of one complexion; for the promise, that he should be the
heir of the world was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but
through the righteousness of faith, Romans 4: 13, that is, through the
righteousness of Christ the object of faith, and who is expressly called faith,
Galatians 3: 23, 25. And it is added, Romans 4: 14, for if they, which are
of the law, be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: Faith,
that may be, Christ, the object of faith, is made void, and all the actings of
faith upon him are vain and of none effect, conformed to what the same Apostle
says in Galatians 2: 21. If righteousness come by
the law, then Christ is dead in vain. And as this faith is made void, so
the promises of this faith, that was to come, are of no effect. Therefore the
object of Abraham’s faith was Christ, the promised Messiah and that Faith that
was to come, and the righteousness of that Faith. He reckons up, in the
following words, to very little purpose, the several objects of faith from John
3: 16, 5: 46, 29: 31, 8: 24, Romans 10: 9, I Peter 1: 21, John 12: 44,
312 (322)
I John 5: 10, and supposes that no where Christ’s
righteousness is mentioned as the object. But wherever faith or its object is
mentioned, in the matter of justification, Christ’s righteousness is never
excluded, more than himself, for he as himself was the Cautioner, so his
righteousness was fidejussory; and faith acting upon one must necessarily act
on both, these being inseparable; besides, that elsewhere this is expressly
enough mentioned. Yet he grants, that it is of nearer concernment to the
main, to believe this righteousness of Christ than the believing of many other
things besides, comprehended in the Scriptures. But why I pray, if this belong not to the object of justifying faith? He not
only will have us believe, that Christ’s righteousness is not reckoned amongst
the objects of faith, as justifying; but he will also give a reason, why it is
not so reckoned; to wit, because, though it ought to be and cannot but be believed
by that faith, which justifies, yet it may be believed also by such a faith,
which is so far from justifying, that it denies this Christ to be the Son of
God. Thus some Jews gave testimony to his innocence, who
yet received him not for their Messiah, nor believed him to be God; and this is
the frame of the Turkish faith, for the most part, concerning him at this day.
Answer: It is one thing to believe a righteousness,
but it is another thing to believe in it, and rest upon it. The innocence of
Christ as a man, before men is one thing, but his complete surety-righteousness
as one that was both God and man, is another thing. Now justifying faith looks
to, and rests upon his whole surety-righteousness and looks upon him, as
God-Man; Therefore it cannot be thus believed (which is the only right way of
believing it) but only by such, as lean to this righteousness, as the
righteousness of the promised Messiah, and Mediator, God-Man, as Abraham did,
and as all his children do: and this is the only faith, that is justifying and
saving. It seems by this expression, that there is no more to be regarded in
Christ’s righteousness, but the mere innocence of a man.
Fifthly
he tells us that faith, which is here said to be imputed, verse 3, is that
faith, by which he believed in God, that quickeneth the dead, &c. verse 17.
But the righteousness of Christ can in no tolerable construction be called
that faith. Answer: That the proposition is false, appears sufficiently
from what is said: and these words in verse 17 show how firmly and fixedly
Abraham received and rested on the promise, and thing promised: but it is not
said, that that was imputed to him for his righteousness; but that which was
imputed was the righteousness of faith, that was to come, whereon he believed
and rested.
Sixthly
and seventhly he says that the faith, that was
imputed unto Abraham was that, wherein he was said not to be weak, verse 19,
and is opposed to doubting, verse 20, and by which he was fully assured, that
he who had promised was able to do it, verse 21. Answer: This is likewise
denied. For the thing that was imputed was not that act of faith, but the
righteousness of the Messiah, whom he undoubtedly expected to come out of his
loins, as man, and that even when he had no appearance of an issue: for it is
this righteousness which is the righteousness of Faith, and is distinct from
the act of believing; for it is said, that it shall be imputed to us, if we
believe; which expression could
313 (323)
be no way satisfying, if nothing were meant to be
imputed here, but our believing; for then the sense would be this, we shall be
reputed believers, if we are believers.
Eighthly
he says, That which shall be imputed unto us for
righteousness, is said to be our believing on him, that raised up the Lord Jesus,
verse 24. This is sick of the same disease with the foregoing: nothing like
that is here said, but rather we may see, that some distinct thing is promised
to be imputed to us, if we believe on him, that raised up Christ from the dead,
which clearly says, that the imputation of something to us for righteousness is
promised, when we believe: and shall any man then think, that believing itself
is the thing, which is to be imputed?
Lastly
he tells us, (which is but what we heard before, and is shortly this,) That a tropical and metonymical interpretation
turns Paul’s perspicuity into greater obscurity than any light of Scripture
knows well how to relieve. Answer: Whatever darkness he conceives herein,
yet others see in these tropical expressions a greater beauty of illumination,
and a greater emphasis of strength and signification, than all his rhetoric is
able to darken. The Apostle, not only here, but almost everywhere, while
speaking of this subject, follows this same manner of expression, especially in
Galatians 3. Nor do we say, that the word Faith is here taken simply for Christ’s
righteousness; but for Christ’s righteousness laid hold on and applied by
faith; so that what is in one place called the righteousness of Christ, is in
another place called the righteousness of faith, and the righteousness which is
by faith and through faith: as Christ is called our hope, not simply,
but as our hope acts upon him, as the real and true object thereof.
He
cannot deny, but faith is sometimes taken for its object, even for Christ; yet
he says, 1. That though the faculty be sometimes put for the object, yet the
act seldom, or never. The act or exercise of the grace of hope is never put for
the things hoped for, but hope itself is sometimes found in that signification
as Colossians 1: 5, Titus 2: 13. Now that which is
here said to be imputed unto Abraham, was not the habit or grace of faith, but
the act. Answer: Neither habit, nor grace, nor act of faith is here said to
be imputed, but the object, which the act may also denote, as well as the
habit. And if he limit and restrict this to any particular act, he must say,
that Abraham was not justified before this time and after this act was past, it
could not be said, that his faith was imputed to him for righteousness.
But 2. he says, That though it were granted, that the act
itself as well as the faculty or habit may be sometimes put for the object, yet
when the act and object have been named together, and the act expressed by an
object proper to it, and further something immediately ascribed unto this act,
under that consideration (all which is plainly seen in this clause, ‘Abraham
believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness’) in this case to
conceive and affirm, that what is ascribed, is neither ascribed unto the act
itself, there mentioned, nor unto the object mentioned, but unto a third thing,
not once mentioned in the text, is to turn our back upon the text. Answer:
Do we not see in Titus 2: 13 where it is said, looking for that blessed hope
and glorious appearing of the great God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ, that
Christ
314 (324)
is denominated by the act or habit of hope, and called
our hope, and that here both act and object are named together, to wit,
looking, looking for our Saviour Jesus Christ? It is true, there is nothing
here immediately ascribed to this act; but not withstanding thereof, we see
Christ the object of hope, denominated by the act or habit of hope. And whereas
it is said that this third thing, the righteousness of Christ, is not once
mentioned, it may suffice, that it is sufficiently included, and clearly enough
expressed when mention is made of righteousness, and of the righteousness
of faith, and of righteousness imputed (2.) It is also to be
considered, that in that clause, Abraham believed God, and it was counted to
him for righteousness, it is not said, that faith, or his believing was
counted to him for righteousness, but that it was counted &c. and
that is not his faith, but the marrow of the Gospel, which God at that time
preached unto him, and so there is nothing in this clause, immediately ascribed
to this act but a third thing understood.
Lastly,
he says, the righteousness of Christ is not the object of faith, as
justifying; only the Scriptures propose his righteousness, or obedience to the
law, as that, which is to be believed; and so it may be termed a partial
object, as is the creation of the world, and that Cain was Adam’s son. But the
object of faith as justifying properly is either Christ himself, or the promise
of God concerning the redemption of the world by him. Answer: (1.) Hereby
we see, that instead of a justifying faith, he gives us a mere historical
faith: and indeed such as deny the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, must
of necessity substitute a new sort of faith, in room of that, which we own for
the only justifying faith. But though justifying faith contain in it that
historical faith, and presuppose it; yet it includes more, and hath other
peculiar actings of soul upon and towards Christ, and his righteousness (which
here we cannot separate, far less oppose to each other, as our adversary doth)in reference to the man’s liberation from the sentence of
the law, and the curse due to him for the breach thereof, now charged home upon
him by the Lord, and an awakened conscience: (2.) By Christ’s righteousness we
do not understand his simple innocence, or freedom from the transgression of
the law; but his whole Mediatory work, in his state of humiliation, as
satisfying the offended Law-Giver, and answering all the demands of the Law,
both as to doing and suffering, which debt we were lying under. (3.) Justifying
faith eyes him thus, runs to him and accepts of him, as he is thus set forth by
God to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, Romans 3: 25, and as
making reconciliation; for faith receives the atonement, Romans 5: 11, and it
receives abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness, verse 17.
Justifying faith must receive him, as the Lord our Righteousness; and as
made of God to us righteousness. Therefore is this righteousness of God
called also the Righteousness of Faith, or the Righteousness of God,
which is by faith of Jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all them that believe,
Romans 3: 22. A righteousness, which is through the faith of
Christ, or the righteousness, which is of God by faith, Philippians 3: 9.
Thus we have examined all that this man hath brought
by way of reason (for as for authorities on the one hand, or other, I purposely
wave them in
315 (325)
this whole discourse) to prove; that faith properly
taken is imputed for righteousness and that the tropical sense, commonly
received by the orthodox (which we have also chosen to follow, notwithstanding
that there is another sense given of the words by some, to evade this tropical
sense, and by which the adversaries against whom we here deal, can receive no
advantage) is to be utterly laid aside and rejected; and in answering him, we
have answered others also, who do but urge the same things.
Yet if
any should enquire, if the Apostle doth not mean, that faith properly taken is
our righteousness, and is imputed to us and accounted our righteousness, why
would he say so plainly, that faith is imputed, or counted for
righteousness? I answer: the expressions which the Holy Ghost hath used,
should satisfy us, though we should know no reason beside his good pleasure, why
he did express the matter so: It is our part, to search into his meaning, according
to the surest rules of finding out the sense of the Scriptures, among which is
to be reckoned as a safe one, not to be rejected, viz. to attend the scope,
with the connection and cohesion of the words as they lie, and contribute unto
that scope, together with the common, plain and frequently reiterated
expressions and assertions of the Spirit of God, in other places, where the
same matter is treated of: for to the end, that we may be exercised, in the
study of the Scriptures, and in comparing Scripture with Scripture for finding
out the mind of the Lord, hath he thought good to express the same matter in
diverse places, and in various ways, and in some places more plainly, what in
other places appears more obscure. And it cannot be judged a safe way of
interpreting Scripture, to fix upon one expression and give it a sense, or take
it in such a sense, as tends manifestly to darken the whole doctrine of the
Spirit of the Lord, concerning that truth, and to cross the scope, to mar the
connection, and to contradict multitudes of other passages of Scripture. It is
not unusual for the Apostle to use several expressions, in a figurative sense. How
often is the word Law taken for obedience to the Law? What sense could
be made of Galatians 3: 25 if the word Faith should be there taken
properly, and not for its object? as also verses 2 and
5 of that same chapter. And what sense shall we put upon these expressions. They
which are of faith, Galatians 3: 7, 9, and as many as are of the works
of the law, verse 10, and upon many such like, if all these words must be
taken properly? Nay, how little of this whole matter of justification is
expressed to us, without tropes and figures? which yet
do not darken, but give a more special and divine luster unto the truths, so
expressed. How often is the word Hope put for its object, for the thing
hoped for? And though this might satisfy us herein; yet further, if I might adventure
to give a reason of this manner of expression here, or rather to point forth
what this expression should signify and hold forth to us, I would say, that
Paul is not handling this controversy about justification, in a mere
speculative manner; and therefore does not use such philosophical and
metaphysical notions and expressions there about, as some now think so
necessary, that without the same they judge themselves not in case to explain
the matter to the capacity of the meanest, which would rather have darkened,
then explained
316 (326)
the matter to the ordinary capacity of Christians, as
I judge the way, that some of late take, in explicating this matter,
contributes much more to the darkening of the same: at least to me: but the
Apostle is handling this matter in a practical manner; so as both such he wrote
unto, and the Church of Christ to the end of the world, might so understand
this necessary and fundamental truth, as to put the same in practice: and
therefore doth say, that Faith is imputed unto righteousness, to show,
that it is not the righteousness of Christ, conceived in our heads, that will
save and justify us; but his righteousness laid hold on, brought home and
applied by faith: that so all might see and be convinced of the necessity of
faith, whereby the soul goes out to Christ, lays to his righteousness, and
might not satisfy themselves with a notion of Christ and his righteousness,
never applied by faith; but be induced to lay hold on him by faith, to the end
they might have an interest in Christ’s righteousness, the same being, upon
their faith, bestowed upon them, and reckoned upon their score. The expression
is most emphatic to hold forth, the necessity now of faith, according to the
Lord’s sovereign appointment, as if thereby Christ’s righteousness and their
faith were become one thing, as being wholly inseparable in this affair, so
that it comes to one, whether by faith, we understand the grace as acting upon
and connoting the object, or the object, as acted upon by the grace of faith as
in that expression, the righteousness of faith, Romans 4: 13. Faith may
either be interpreted to be Christ, as laid hold on by faith, and so the
meaning will be through the righteousness of Christ, laid hold on by faith, and
faith may be the same way explained in the following verses 14 and 16, for
if they which are of the law, be heirs, faith is made void, i.e. if the
grand heritage come by the law and by obedience to it, the Gospel, holding
forth Christ to be laid hold on by faith, is made void, as to this end: and
again, verse 16, therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace, i.e.
it is of and by Christ, laid hold upon by faith, that it might be by grace. Or faith
in all these may be interpreted to be faith as acting upon the object, Christ
and his righteousness; and the consequence and force of the words will be found
to be the same, whether of these ways we explain the matter. As, when speaking
of the Israelites stung in the wilderness, it were all one to say, they were
healed by the brazen serpent, to wit, look to; or they were healed by their
look, to wit, upon the brazen serpent, for still it will be understood, that
all the virtue came from the brazen serpent (or him rather, that was typified
thereby) yet so as it was to be looked upon; and that their looking was but an
instrumental mean thereunto, and when a mean thereunto must include the object
looked unto. We hear it sometimes said of persons miraculously cured, that
their faith made them whole, whileas the virtue came from the object acted upon
by faith, as Peter fully explains the matter saying, Acts 3: 16 And his name,
through faith in his name, hath made this man strong. Thus we see, how this
matter may be safely and must be understood, when the virtue and efficacy of
the principal cause is attributed to the instrumental cause: and yet, lest any
should stumble at the expression, and pervert it, as many do today, the Apostle
abundantly caveats against this by telling
317 (327)
us so plainly and so fully and so frequently, of the
righteousness of God, which is had by faith, and through faith, as we have
seen; and never speaks of a righteousness had, because of faith, or for faith;
nor says he, that faith is our righteousness, while treating of justification.