any

Delight. Again, under the Fall: And here they were not considered either as lying in a fallen State, as the Descendants of the First Adam; nor as in Part restored, under Imperfections of Grace and Holiness: But as in Christ their Redeemer, their Righteousness.In him the Father from Everlasting delighted; and thro' him in those who were chosenunto the Obedience of Jesus Christ, and Sprikling of his Blood, 1 Pet i. 2. This was and is a Sin-covering Righteousness, wherein the Father took a Prospect of his Elect as complete, and without Spot. Behold then the Objects of God's Delight! Not as in Adam, not as in the Fall, not as we behold them in their Guilt and Pollution. Thus God could not have Satisfaction or Pleasure in them; they were not meet Objects for his Delight. Yet even thus considered, they were meet Objects for his Love of Benevolence or gracious Good-will.Here then lies the Ground of the Distinction, in the under-fall Way. God loved poor fallen Man, and gave his Son a Ransom; he gave his Son, and took up an infinite Delight in his ransomed, thro' the Atonement of his BloodThis Love of Complacency then supposes the Righteousness of Christ and Reconciliation foreviewed. There was Love antecedent to the very Gift of Christ: But Well-pleasedness and Delight is the Fruit of Christ's Obedience. It is in him, and for his Sake. I don't use this Term, Love of Good-will, to lessen or diminish that Love which give Christ, it is so transcendent that it cannot be enough magnified: (this opened the way for God's making

us such as he could delight in) but only to distinguish it from that which follows the foreseen Performances of our Redeemer. Delight, as it is a Supralapsarian Benefit, is altogether inseparable, and not at all to be distinguished from God's Good-will towards us; and it is absolutely eternal, and eternally unchangeable. The Entrance of Sin by the Fall made no Alteration here. But when Delight supposes or includes Friendship and Reconciliation, it is evident that this is a Fruit of the Mediation of Jesus Christ.

Object. Could God delight in Men in their Sins, lying in the Fall, in their Blood and Pollution? Thus it is certain they were not delectable Objects, but Children of Wrath, Objects of Divine Displeasure, and under the Curse.

Answ. 1. God as a Lawgiver was angry and offended with all Mankind for Sin: But there was a Ransom provided, and satisfaction to be made, foreviewed, which the Father took a secret Pleasure and Delight in from Everlasting. 2. The Elect by Nature, as Children of the First Adam, and in relation to the Covenant of Works, were under the Curse of the Law; viz. a Sentence of Death: But Infinite Love provided a Ransom and Redemption from that Curse. In that glorious Redemption God delighted, and in them viewed therein, from Everlasting. For who dares set a Date hereof? This is a different thing from' their being viewed in the First Adam.

3. Therefore; It is granted, As fallen, as sinful Creatures none were the Objects of God's

Delight. I say, concretely considered as involving the state they lay in, none were so. And while we are in a state of Nature, we are in that state which God hated and doth hate. And so considered we could be only the Qbjects of a Love of Benevolence. Hence many Christians can get no further, but are fain to take it up so, that the Elect, while Unbelievers, are loved only with a Love of Benevolence; but when they come to believe, they are then beloved with a Love of Delight. But, 4. Tho' as fallen and as lying in that State, they are not the Objects of God's Delight, yet while such they are so, upon another Account, and under another Consideration. The imperfect Holiness of Believers is not able to make them meet Objects of God's Delight, nor are they in this World such as he can fully delight in, but only as they are beheld in Jesus Christ. Surely all that know their own Hearts will agree to this. And tho' not as in thyself, O Believer, yet as in Christ, the glorious God beholds thee as without Spot, and has Delight in thee. We are too apt to think that God's Thoughts are as ours, and that he sees Things as we see them, Isa. lv. 8, 9. Job x. 4. Howbeit as Sin is always the Object of God's Dis pleasure, even in his People; so their Graces, and Spiritual Performances of Duty, are the Object of his Well-pleasedness, in which, thro' the Righteousness of his Son, he hath Delight also, as the Fruits of his Holy Spirit. Thus we must hold the Balance of Divine Truths, and not set one in Opposition to another, as the manner of some is,

་

CHAP. III.

Of Christ's bearing the Filth of Sin. The Author's Thoughts humbly submitted to better Judgments.

THA

HAT Christ bore the Filth of Sin, as well as the Guilt of it, is by some asserted to be a Truth of the Gospel; and charged by others to be a Position at least bordering upon Blasphemy. Can these widely differing Opinions (as they seem to be) be brought near to a Reconciliation? I conceive they may.

The Filth of Sin is either Original, viz. the Corruption of Nature which we brought into the World with us; or that Pollution which further arises from every new Transgression. The Filth of Sin is the Stain or inherent Defilement thereof cleaving to our Nature. And perhaps the Odiousness and Hatefulness of it in God's Eye, may also bear this Name.

I lay it down as a Truth not to be departed from, that Christ bore Sin only by way of Im putation. It follows then, that if Filth is not capable to be imputed, Jesus Christ did not, could not, bear it." Imputation is nothing else, but its being set to his Account, to answer, to suffer, to satisfy for, as if he had been the Offender. This Doctrine is so essential to the Life and Comfort of a Believer, that I wonder if any who have known the Terror of the Lord, or tasted that the Lord is gracious, should at all call it into Question.

Christ

bore our Sins, Pet. ii. 24. that is the Scripture Phrase without the Distinction of Guilt and Filth. To say that he bore the Guilt of Sin, may mean only, he bore our Obnoxious

ness to Punishment, and so seems to evade his But the Scripture saith, Now Sin is either the

Hence

bearing of Sin itself. He bore our SINS. Sinful Act or Offence, or the Defilement arising therefrom. This latter has truly the Nature of Sin, and was as such set to Christ's Account. It is not the Guilt of Sin (as Guilt means only our Obnoxiousness to Punishment) that was imputed to Jesus Christ. It seems not proper to speak so. But SIN was imputed; and the Result of that Imputation was Guiltiness in the Eye of the Law and Vindictive Justice of God. Yea, and this was all the Result that could be; and the Issue was Punishment, and thereby Satisfaction. Christ was not filthy by bearing of Sin, but guilty only; and, that not because Guilt was imputed, but because Sin was imputed in its Contrariety to the Law. All that is truly and properly Sin Christ bore; but a polluted defiled Nature is Sin, it is contrary to the Law. The Lord has laid on him the Iniquity of us all. Now is not Filth, Iniquity, according to the Apostle's Definition of Sin, 1 John iii. 4.? How hateful to God is that Corruption of Nature, which we brought into the World with us! And wherefore? Because it is contrary to his Holiness, i. e. because it is Sin. In Type, when all the Iniquities of Israel, and all their Transgressions in all their Sins, were put upon the Head of the Scape-Goat, was their Filthiness left behind? Was not the Pollution of their Nature to be confessed? Surely, it comes in among the ALL, or else they were not so pure as they imagined themselves to be,