You pretend in the beginning of your second chapter, to prove your assertion, viz. 'That the great errand that Christ came upon, was to put us again into possession of that holiness which we had lost' (p. 12). For proof whereof you bring John the Baptist's doctrine (Matt 3:1,2), and the angel's saying to Zacharias (Luke 1:16,17), and the prophet Malachi (3:1-3), in which texts there is as much for your purpose, and no more, than there is in a perfect blank; for which of them speak a word of the righteousness or holiness which we have lost? Or where is it said, either by these mentioned, or by the whole scripture, that we are to be restored to, and put again into possession of that holiness? These are but the dictates of your human nature.
John's ministry was, 'To make ready a people prepared for the Lord Jesus'; not to possess them with themselves and their own, but now lost, holiness. And so the angel told his father, saying, 'Many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God': Not to Adam's innocency, or to the holiness that we lost by him. Neither did the prophet Malachi prophesy that Christ at his coming should put men again in possession of the holiness we had lost. And I say again, as you here fall short of your purpose, so I challenge you to produce but one piece of a text, that in the least looketh to such a thing. The whole tenor of the scripture, that speaks of the errand of Christ Jesus, tells us another lesson, to wit, That he himself came to save us, and that by his own righteousness; not that in Adam, or which we have lost in him, unless you can say and prove that we had once, even before we were converted, the holiness of Christ within us, or the righteousness of Christ upon us.
But you yet get on, and tell us, 'That this was also the prophesy of the angel to Joseph (p. 14) in these words HE [Jesus] shall save his people from their sins.' 'Not [say you] from the punishment of them, although that be a true sense too; but not the primary, but secondary, and implied only, and the consequence of the former salvation' (p. 15).
Answer. Thus Penn the quaker and you run in this, in one and the self same spirit; he affirming that sanctification is antecedent to justification, but not the consequence thereof.
2. But what salvation? Why salvation? say you: First from the filth; for that is the primary and first sense: justification from the guilt, being the never-failing consequence of this. But how then must Jesus Christ, first save us from the filth? You add in p. 16, 'That he shall bring in, instead of the ceremonial observations, a far more noble, viz., An inward substantial righteousness: and by abrogating that [namely of the ceremonies] he shall establish only this inward righteousness.' This is, that holiness, or righteousness you tell us of, in the end of the chapter going before, that you acknowledge we had lost; so that the sum of all that you have said, is, That the way that Christ will take to save his people from their sins, is, first to restore unto them, and give them possession of, the righteousness that they had lost in Adam: and having established this in them, he would acquit them also of guilt. But that this is a shameless error, and blasphemy, is apparent, from which hath already been asserted of the nature of the holiness, or righteousness, that we have lost, viz., That it was only natural of the old covenant, typical: and such as might stand with perfect ignorance of the mediation of Jesus Christ: and now I add, That for Christ to come to establish this righteousness, is alone, as if he should be sent from heaven, to overthrow, and abrogate the eternal purpose of grace, which the Father had purposed should be manifested to the world by Christ. But Christ came not to restore, or to give us possession of that which was once our own holiness, but to make us partakers of that which is in him, 'that we might be made partakers of HIS holiness.' Neither (were it granted that you speak the truth) is it possible for a man to be filled with inward gospel holiness, and righteousness, that yet abideth, as before the face of God, under the curse of the law, or the guilt of his own transgressions (Heb 12). The guilt must therefore, first be taken off, and we set free by faith in that blood, that did it, before we can act upon pure Christian principles. Pray tell me the meaning of this one text; which speaking of Christ, saith, 'Who when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high' (Heb 1:3). Tell me, I say, by this text, whether is here intended the sins of all that shall be saved? If so, what kind of a purging is here meant, seeing thousands, and thousands of thousands, of the persons intended by this act of purging were not then in being, nor their personal sins in act? And note, he saith, he purged them, before he sat down at the right hand of God: purging then, in this place, cannot first, and primarily, respect the purging of the conscience: but the taking, the complete taking of the guilt, and so the curse from before the face of God, according to other scriptures: 'He hath made him to be sin, and accursed of God for us.' Now he being made the sin which we committed, and the curse which we deserved; there is no more sin nor curse; I mean to be charged by the law, to damn them that shall believe, not that their believing takes away the curse, but puts the soul upon trusting to him, that before purged this guilt, and curse: I say, before he sat down on the right hand of God; not to suspend, as you would have it, but to take away the sin of the world. 'The Lord hath laid upon him the iniquities of us all' (Isa 53:6). And he bare them in his own body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24): nor yet that he should often offer himself; for then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now, (and that at once,) in the end of the world hath he appeared, to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himself (Heb 9:24-26). Mark, he did put it away by the sacrifice of his body and soul, when he died on the cross: but he could not then put away the inward filth of those, that then remained unconverted; or those that as yet wanted being in the world. The putting away of sin therefore, that the Holy Ghost here intendeth, is, such a putting of it away, as respecteth the guilt, curse, and condemnation thereof, as it stood by the accusations of the law, against all flesh before the face of God; which guilt, curse, and condemnation, Christ himself was made in that day, when he died the death for us. And this is the first and principal intendment of the angel, in that blessed saying to godly Joseph, concerning Christ; 'He shall save his people from their sins'; from the guilt and curse due to them, first: and afterwards from the filth thereof. This is yet manifest, further; because the heart is purified by faith, and hope (Acts 15:9; 1 John 3:3). Now it is not the nature of faith; I mean, of justifying faith, to have any thing for an object; from which it fetcheth peace with God, and holiness before, or besides the Christ of God himself; for he is the way to the Father: and no man can come to the Father, but by him. Come; that is, so as to find acceptance, and peace with him: the reason is, because without his blood, guilt remains (Heb 9:22). He hath made peace by the blood of his cross: so then, faith in the first place seeketh peace. But why peace first? Because till peace is fetched into the soul, by faith's laying hold on the blood of Christ: sin remains in the guilt and curse, though not in the sight of God, yet upon the conscience, through the power of unbelief. 'He that believeth not, stands yet condemned' (John 3:18,19). Now, so long as guilt, and the curse in power remains, there is not purity, but unbelief; not joy, but doubting; not peace, but peevishness; not content, but murmuring, and angering against the Lord himself. 'The law worketh wrath' (Rom 4:15). Wherefore, as yet there can be no purity of heart, because that faith yet wants his object. But having once found peace with God by believing what the blood of Christ hath done; joy followeth; so doth peace, quietness, content, and love; which is also the fulfilling of the law: yet not from such dungish principles as yours, for so the apostle calls them (Phil 3:8). But from the Holy Ghost itself; which God, by faith, hath granted to be received by them that believe in the blood of his Jesus.
But you add, That Christ giveth, first repentance, and then forgiveness of sins (p. 17).
Answer. 1. This makes nothing for the holiness which we lost in
Adam: for the proof of which you bring that text (Acts 5:31).
2. But for Christ to take way guilt, and the curse, from before the face of God, is one thing; and to make that discovery, is another.
3. Again, Christ doth not give forgiveness for the sake of that repentance, which hath its rise, originally from the dictates of our own nature, which is the thing you are to prove; for that repentance is called the sorrow of this world, and must be again repented of: but the repentance mentioned in the text, is that which comes from Christ: But,
4. It cannot be for the sake of gospel-repentance, that the forgiveness of sins is manifested, because both are his peculiar gift.