excludes all EPIEIKEIAN, pardon and connivance, but strictly urges obedience with all the heart, with all the soul, and with all the mind; reith all our might. Thou hast commanded us to keep thy precepts diligently. 3. Of perseverance, without cutting or carving upon that obedience which God rigorously requires pronouncing, that all his righteousness that he hath done shall not be remembered, when the righ eous turneth away from his righteousness, which was fulfilled in Adam; emphatical is that expression, Cursed is he that confirmeth not [does not stand to, does not constantly observe,] all the words of this law to do them.

XXV. Such a perfect observance of the laws of the covenant, quite to the period which God had fixed for probation, would have given man a right to the reward. Not from any intrinsic proportion of the work to the reward, as the grosser Papists proudly boast; but from God's engagement and acceptance, which was no wise unbecoming him to enter into. Nor had man, before the consummating of that obedience, even in the state of innocence, a right to life. He was only in the state of acquiring a right; which would at length be actually acquired, when he could say, I have stood to the conditions of the covenant, I have perfectly and constantly done what was commanded, now I claim and expect, that thou my God wilt crown me with the promised happiness.

XXVI. How absurdly again do the Papists assert, that Adam, as he came from the hands of his Creator, as the adopted son of God, had a right to supernatural happiness, as to his paternal inheritance, which," according to Bellarmine,¶ "is due to the adopted son of God, in right of adoption, previous to all good works." But this is truly a preposterous way of reasoning. For the right of adoption belongs to the covenant of grace in Chist Jesus: The adoption of children is by Jesus Christ.** Besides, if this opi

* Mat. xxii. 37. † Deut. vi. 5. ‡ Psal. cxix. 4. § Ezek. xviii. 24. Deut. xxvii. 26. De Justificat. 1. v. c. 27. ** Eph. i. 5.

nion were valid, good works could not be required as a condition for acquiring a right to eternal life; but only serve to prevent the forfeiture of the right of a son: by which means the whole design of the covenant of works, and all the righteousness which is by the law, are destroyed. In fine, what is more ab surd, than the trifling manner in which these sophisters talk of the grace of adoption, as giving Adam a right to enter upon an heavenly inheritance, in a legal covenant; when, on the other hand, they wickedly contend for the merit of works, under a covenant of grace? Where only that assertion is to be affirmed and applied, The inheritance is due to an adopted son of, God, in right of adoption, previous to all good works.

С П А Р. IV.

Of the Promises of the Covenant of Works.

LET

ET what has been said suffice as to the condition of this covenant. We may now enquire into the PROMISES of it. Here, first, the Socinians come under our notice, who obstinately deny all promises. For thus Volkelious* says, "Scarce, if at all, was any general promise made to the men of that age; but rather threatenings and terrors were then set before them. For we do not see God promising to Adam, upon his abstaining from the frutit of that tree, any reward of obedience; but threatening destruction, if. he did not obey." Of this assertion he assigns the following reason. Moreover, the reason why God; at that time would be obeyed, without almost proposing any general reward, seems to be this; because, at the very beginning of the world, he would shew to all, that he owed nothing to any, but was himself the most absolute Lord of all."

* De vera religione, 1. ii. c. 8. † Gen. ii, 17.

H. To this I oppose the following things. 1. Man's natural conscience itself teaches him, that God desires not to be worshipped in vain, nor that obedience to his commands will go unrewarded and for nought. The Heathens were also apprized of this. Let us hear Epictetus. He, in Arrian,* speaks thus "If there are no gods, how is it the end of man to obey the gods? But if there are, and they be yet regardless of every thing, how will the matter be mended? But if they both are, and take care of human affairs, but men have no recompense to expect from them, nor I neither, will not the matter be still worse?" Let us add Seneca.† "God does not want servants. Why so? He ministers himself to mankind; being every where present and at hand. He will never make a right progress, who does not conceive of God as he ought; dealing all things, bestowing his benefits freely. Why are the gods so benificent? It is owing to their nature. The first article of the worship of the gods is, to believe that they are; then to render them the honor of their majesty, and of their goodness, without which there is no majesty: to know, that they preside over the world, govern all things by their power, take special care of mankind, without neglecting individuals." In like manner, among the articles of the Jewish faith, it is established, as a thing naturally known, that there are "rewards as well as punishments with God;" according to that common saying, "God defrauds no creature of its reward." The worship of God presupposes the belief of this: For he that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him ‡

III. 2. Moreover this faith is not merely a certain persuasion of the mind, arising from reasoning and the consideration of the goodness of God; but to render it a genuine faith, it must rest on the word and promise of God. Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God § 3. This was the intent of * Dissert. l. i. c. 12. Epist. 95. Heb. xi. 6. § Rom. x. 17.

the tree of life, which the Socinians themselves allow to have been a "kind of symbol, though obscure, of eternal life." Now, that symbol proposed to Adam, would have been of no use, unless he had understood it, and considered it as a seal of the promise made by God. It would have been a mere farce, to have, prohibited man from access to and eating of this tree after the fall, unless thereby God had shewn him, that he had forfeited the thing promised, and consequently was become unworthy of the use of that symbol and sacrament. 4. If no promise was made, they lived without hope. For the hope which maketh not ashamed, is founded on the promises. Now, this is the character of the woful calamity of those who are twithout God in the world, that they have no hope.† 5. God represents to Cain a thing known long before, even by nature, much more by paternal instruction: If thou dost well, shalt thou not be accepted? But did this maxim begin to be true, and to be known after the fall? 6. The very threatening infers a promise. The language of which at least is, that he was to be deprived of that happiness, which otherwise he would have continued to enjoy. So that from thence we may most certainly conclude, that man had no reason to be afraid of loosing that happiness, as long as he kept himself from sin. 7. By this assertion of our adversaries, according to their own hypotheses, all the religion of the first man is destroyed. Seeing, as our author writes at the beginning of this chapter, "the promise of rewards proposed to well-doing, is closely interwoven with religion." 8. The reason he assigns for this assertion is foolish and to no purpose. For after so many and such liberal promises of eternal life, which God hath given us in Christ, is it now less evident, that God is indebted to none, and that he is the most absolute Lord of all things? Does the Supreme Being, by his gracious promises, derogate any thing from his most absolute dominion? Ought it not to be known in every age, that God owes nothing to

* In compend. Socinian. cap. ii. § 5. † Eph. ii. 15. Gen. iv. 7°

any? How comes it then, that God did not always forbear promising..

IV. Let this therefore be a settled point, that this covenant was not established without promises. Let us now inquire what sort of promise God made to Adam. We believe that God promised to Adam eternal life, that is, the most perfect fruition of himself, to endure for ever, after having run the course of his obedience. We are induced to this belief by these arguments.

V. 1. The apostle teaches, that God, by his Son sent in the flesh, did what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh.* Now, it is certain, that Christ hath procured to his own people a right to eternal life, to be enjoyed in heaven in its due time. This the apostle declares the law cannot now do, not of itself, or because it has no such promises, but because it is weak through the flesh. If sin therefore had not intervened, the law would have brought men to that eternal life, which Christ promises and freely gives to his people. This appears to me a conclusive argument.

VI. 2. 'Tis beyond dispute among all, that Paul, in his epistles to the Romans and Galatians, where he treats of justification, does, under that name comprehend the adjudging to eternal life. He is every where proving, that a sinner cannot be justified, that is, lay claim to eternal life, by the works of the law; but never by this argument, that the law had no promises of eternal life, but because man is by the law brought to the acknowledgment of sin, and the confession of deserved damnation.† On this point he insists with great labour, though otherwise he might have very easily cut short the whole dispute; by saying, that a title to eternal life was to be sought for by faith in Christ; that in vain ye rest on any law, tho' ye keep it ever so perfectly, in regard it has no promises of eternal life annexed to it. On the contrary, the apostle teaches, that the commandment, consider

*Rom. viii. 3. † Rom. iii. 19. 20.