Chapter XIV: Part 14

(2.) There are some things in other parts of scripture, which give sufficient ground to conclude, that he was a true penitent, which plainly refer to that part of his life which was between his fall and his death. Thus, if we duly weigh several passages in Ecclesiastes, which none can deny that he was the inspired writer of, inasmuch as it is said, in the title or preface set before it, that they are _the words of the preacher, the son of David, king of Jerusalem_, we shall find many things in which he expresses the great sense of the vanity of his past life, when he says, _I gave my heart to know wisdom, and to know madness and folly_, Eccl. i. 17. where, by _madness and folly_, he doubtless intends that which was so in a moral sense, when he indulged his sinful passions, which respects the worst part of his life. And this he farther insists on; _Whatsoever mine eyes desired, I kept not from them, I withheld not my heart from any joy, for my heart rejoiced in all my labour_, Eccl. ii. 10. or in all things, which afterwards were matter of grief and uneasiness to me; in which he observes how he did, as it were, take pains to bring on himself a long train of miseries that troubled him afterwards; and then he plainly expresses his repentance, when he says, _All was vanity and vexation of spirit_, and there was _no profit under the sun_, ver. 11. as though he should say, I turned from God to the creature, to see what happiness I could find therein, but met with nothing but disappointment; he had no profit in those things, whereof he was now ashamed. It is probable, God shewed him the vanity thereof, by his chastening him, or visiting his transgressions with the rod, and his iniquities with stripes, as he had promised to do; and this ended in vexation of spirit, which is a plain intimation of that godly sorrow that proceeded from a sense of sin, which made him, beyond measure, uneasy; and this vexation or uneasiness was so great, that he says, _I hated life_, that is, I hated my past wicked life, and abhorred myself for it, _because the work that is wrought under the sun, is grievous unto me_; that is, the work that I have wrought, was such as gave me grief of heart; _for all is vanity and vexation of spirit_, ver. 17. that is, this is all the consequence thereof: it cannot be supposed that he was weary of his life for the same reasons that many others are, who are deprived of the blessings of common providence, and reduced to that condition that makes them miserable, as to their outward circumstances in the world; but it was the uneasiness he found in his own spirit, the secret wounds of conscience and bitterness of soul, which arose from a sense of sin, that made him thus complain.

And elsewhere, he seems to be sensible of his sin, in heaping up vast treasures, which he calls _loving silver_; and adds, that such an one, which seems very applicable to his own case, _shall not be satisfied with silver, nor he that loveth abundance, with increase; this is also vanity_, chap. v. 10. that is, this had been an instance of his former vanity: and he adds, _The sleep of a labouring man is sweet, whether he eat little or much; but the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep_, ver. 12. If by this we understand that the increase of riches sometimes gives disturbance to, and stirs up the corruptions of those that possess them, and this be applied to himself, it is an acknowledgment of his sin. Or, if we understand by it that the abundance of a rich man will not give him rest at night, when his mind is made uneasy with a sense of the guilt of sin, and this be applied to his own case, when fallen by it; then it intimates that his repentance gave him not only uneasiness by day, but took away his rest by night; and it seems not improbable, that what gave him farther occasion to see the vanity of his past life, was the sense of mortality impressed on him; for he says, _It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting; for that is the end of all men, and the living will lay it to his heart_, chap. vii. 3. that is, he will, or ought to improve the sense of his own frailty, which we may conclude he had done; and therefore adds, _Sorrow is better than laughter; for by the sadness of the countenance, the heart is made better_, ver. 3.

But if it be objected, that all these expressions are not applicable to himself, and many others of the like nature, which might have been referred to, which are expressive of his great repentance; though I cannot but think that the contrary to this seems very probable; yet there is something farther added, that he expressly applies to himself, which refers to his unlawful love of women: _I find more bitter than death the woman whose heart is snares, and nets, and her hands as bands. Whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her, but the sinner shall be taken by her: behold, this have I found, saith the preacher_, ver. 26, 27. If these things be not expressive of repentance, it is hard to say what are.

And to this we may add, that as he expresses a grief of heart for past sins; so he warns others that they may not be guilty of that which he himself found more bitter than death; and accordingly, having described the arts used by the wicked woman, to betray the unthinking passenger, he cautions every one to take heed of declining to her ways; inasmuch as the consequence thereof will be, that a _dart_ will _strike through his liver_, and he is _as a bird that hasteth to the snare, and knoweth not that it is for his life_, Prov. vii. 23. compared with the foregoing verses. He also adds, That _she hath cast down many wounded; yea, many strong men have been slain by her. Her house is the way to hell, going down to the chambers of death_, ver. 26, 27. So that we find in Solomon, two of the greatest evidences that we can have of sincere repentance; namely, a great degree of sorrow for sin, and an earnest desire that others would avoid it, by giving those cautions that are necessary to prevent their falling into the snare in which he had been entangled.

(3.) There is something spoken in Solomon’s commendation, after his death, which may be gathered from what is said, that during the three first years of Rehoboam’s reign, which God approved of he _walked in the way of David and Solomon_, 2 Chron. xi. 17. where we may observe, that Solomon is joined with his father David: so that as there were abatements to be made for the blemishes in David’s reign; the reign of Solomon had in it great blemishes: but as one repented, so did the other, and therefore ought not to be reckoned an apostate.

And to all this we may add, that he was a penman of scripture; and it does not appear that God conferred this honour upon any that apostatized from him; but on the other hand, they have this general character given of them by the apostle Peter, that they were all _holy men of God_, 2 Pet. i. 21. which we must conclude Solomon to have been, till we have greater evidence to the contrary than they can produce who deny it.

3. There are others mentioned in the objection, to wit, Hymeneus and Alexander, whose apostacy we have no ground to doubt of; but we cannot allow that they fell from, or lost the saving grace of faith. It is one thing to fall from the profession of faith, and another thing to lose the grace of faith; therefore, the only thing to be proved in answer to this branch of the objection, is, that these persons, who are described as apostates, never had the truth of grace; or that they only fell from that visible profession which they made thereof; whereby they were reckoned to be, what in reality they were not, namely, true believers. Now that this may appear, let it be considered,

That the apostle speaks of them as having _departed from the faith_, viz. the doctrines of the gospel; and that was attended with blasphemy, for which they were _delivered unto Satan_, which is a phrase used by the apostle here and elsewhere, for persons being cut off from the communion of the church; upon which occasion he advises Timothy _to hold faith and a good conscience, which some having put away, concerning faith, have made shipwreck_, as these have done.

Now the main force of the objection seems to lie in this, that they who have made shipwreck of faith, were once true believers; therefore, such may apostatize, and so fall short of salvation.

To which it may be replied, that by _faith_ here, is meant the doctrines of the gospel, which are often styled _faith_: thus it is said, that the apostle _preached the faith which once he destroyed_, Gal. i. 23. and elsewhere, _before faith came_; that is, before the gospel-dispensation began, and those doctrines were preached that were to be published therein to the world, _we were kept under the law_, chap. iii. 23. And again, _Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith_, ver. 2. that is, by hearing those doctrines that are contained in the gospel. Therefore, that which he chargeth these apostates with, is making shipwreck of faith, considered objectively: they once, indeed, held the truth, but it was in unrighteousness; they had right notions of the gospel, which they afterwards lost: now the apostle advises Timothy not only to _hold faith_, that is, to retain the doctrines of the gospel, as one who had right sentiments of divine truths, but to hold it _with a good conscience_; for I take that expression, _hold faith and a good conscience_, to contain an _hendyadis_; and so it is the same as though he should say, Be not content with an assent to the truths of the gospel, but labour after a conscience void of offence towards God, that thou mayst have the testimony thereof, that thy knowledge of divine truth is practical and experimental, and then thou art out of danger of making shipwreck of faith, as these have done, who held it without a good conscience. It is not said they made shipwreck of a good conscience; for that they never have had; but _concerning faith_, which they once professed, _they made shipwreck_.

The same thing may be said concerning Judas; he apostatized from the faith, which he once made a very great profession of, being not only one of Christ’s disciples, but sent forth with the rest of them, to preach the gospel, and work miracles; yet it is evident, that he had not the saving grace of faith. For our Saviour, who knew the hearts of all men, was not deceived in him (though others were) inasmuch as it is said, _He knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him_, John vi. 64. However, the principal force of the objection lies in this, that Judas must needs have been a believer, because he was given to Christ; and our Saviour says, that _those who were given him were kept by him, and none of them was lost but the son of perdition_, chap. xvii. 12. His being styled _the son of perdition_, argues him an apostate; and his being _given to Christ_ denotes that he was once a true believer; therefore he fell totally and finally. In answer to which,

(1.) Some conclude, that they who are said to _be given to Christ_, are such as were appointed, by the providence of God, to be his servants in the work of the ministry. Now it is said concerning them, that they were given to Christ, to be employed by him in this service; and that all of them were kept faithful, except the son of perdition. If this be the sense of their being given to him, it does not necessarily infer their being made partakers of special grace: it is one thing to be given to Christ, to be employed in some peculiar acts of service, in which his glory is concerned; and another thing to be given to him, as being chosen and called by him, to partake of special communion with him: if Judas had been given to him in this latter sense, he would not have been a son of perdition, but would have been kept by him, as the other disciples were; but inasmuch as he was only given to Christ, that he might serve the design of his providence, in the work of the ministry, he might be lost, or appear to be a son of perdition, and yet not fall from the truth of grace.

(2.) If, by being _given to Christ_, we understand a being given to him, as objects of his special love, we must suppose, that all who were thus given to him, were kept by him; in which sense Judas, who is called _the son of perdition_, and was not kept by him, was not given to him: accordingly the particle _but_ is not exceptive, but adversative; and it is as though he should say, _All that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost; but the son of perdition is lost_, I have not preserved him; for he was not the object of my special care and love; he was not given me to save, therefore he is lost. Now it is certain, that the particle _but_ is used in this sense in many other scriptures, particularly that wherein it is said, _There shall in no wise enter into it_, that is, the heavenly Jerusalem, _any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie, but they which are written in the Lamb’s book of life_, Rev. xxi. 27. _q. d._ ungodly men shall not enter in; but they that are written in the lamb’s book of life shall[93]. Thus much concerning this objection, taken from particular persons, who are supposed to have fallen from grace.

_Obj._ 2. The next objection is taken from what the apostle Paul says concerning the church of the Jews, whom he describes as apostatized from God; and it is evident, that they are, to this day, given up to judicial blindness, and not in the least disposed to repent of that crime for which they were cast off by him; concerning these he says, that they once were holy; _If the first fruit be holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root be holy, so are the branches_, Rom. xi. 16. and afterwards he speaks of _their casting away_, and _some of the branches being broken off, because of unbelief_, ver. 15, 17, 19, 20. Now if the whole church apostatized, we must conclude at least, that some of them were true believers, and therefore true believers may fall from the grace of God.

_Answ._ That the church of the Jews apostatized, and were cut off for their unbelief, is sufficiently evident: but we must distinguish between the apostacy of a professing people, such as the church of the Jews were, who first rejected God, and then were cast off by him, and the apostacy of those who were truly religious among them; the apostle himself gives us ground for this distinction, when he says, _they are not all Israel which are of Israel; neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they all children_, chap. ix. 6, 7. And elsewhere he distinguishes between one who is _a Jew_, as being partaker of the external privileges of the covenant, which that church was under, and a person’s being _a Jew_, as partaking of the saving blessings thereof; as he says, _He is not a Jew which is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God_, Rom. ii. 28, 29. A church may lose its external privileges, and cease to have the honourable character given it; the greatest part of them may be blinded, when, at the same time _the election_, that is, all among them who were chosen to eternal life, _obtained it_, as the apostle observes, chap. xi. 7. and thereby intimates, that some who were members of that church were faithful; those were preserved from the common apostacy, being converted to the Christian faith. Their privileges, as members of a church, were lost, but they still retained their spiritual and inseparable union with Christ, which they had as believers, and not as the result of their being the natural seed of Abraham, they were made partakers of the blessings that accompany salvation; and therefore were not separated from the love of God in Christ, whilst formal professors and hypocrites, who were Abraham’s natural seed, but not his spiritual, were cast off by Christ.

_Obj._ 3. It is farther objected, that there are some who have the character of righteous persons, concerning whom it is supposed, that they may fall away or perish; particularly those mentioned in Ezek. xviii. 24. _When the righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned, in the trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die_: And in Heb. x. 38. it is said, _The just shall live by faith; but if any man_, or, as the word should be rendered, if _he draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him_. Therefore, since the righteous man may turn from his righteousness, and draw back to perdition, the doctrine of the saints’ perseverance cannot be defended.

_Answ._ 1. As to the former of these scriptures, we must consider the sense thereof agreeably to the context, and the scope and design of the prophet therein; he had often reproved them for those vile abominations which they were guilty of, and had denounced the threatnings of God, which should have their accomplishment in their utter ruin; particularly, he fortels the judgments that should sweep away many of them before, and others that should befal them in the captivity: this is the subject principally insisted on by the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel; whereupon sometimes they were represented as disliking the doctrine, desiring that _smooth things_ might be prophesied unto them, and _the holy one of Israel might cease from before them_. At other times they are represented as complaining of the hardship of this dispensation, intimating that it was unjust and severe, and, at the same time, justifying themselves, as though they had done nothing that deserved it; but all this was to befal them for the sins of their fathers, and accordingly there was a proverbial expression often made use of by them, mentioned verse 2d of this chapter, _The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge_; by which they did not understand that we expect to perish eternally for our fathers’ sins, in which sense it must be taken, if this objection has any force in it: now God, by the prophet, tells them that they had no reason to use this proverb, and so puts them upon looking into their past conduct, and enquiring, whether they had not been guilty of the same sins that their fathers were charged with? which, if they could exculpate themselves from, they should be delivered, and not die, that is, not fall by those judgments which either should go before, or follow the captivity; for that seems to be the sense of _dying_, according to the prophetic way of speaking, as we have observed elsewhere.[94] For the understanding of this scripture we must consider, that the prophet addresses himself to _the house of Israel_, who are represented, ver. 25. as complaining, that _the way of the Lord was not equal_; or, that God’s threatnings or judgments, which were the forerunners of the captivity, were such as they had not deserved; and therefore he tells them that he would deal with them according to their deserts, ver. 24. _When the righteous_, that is, one whose conversation before this seemed to be unblemished, and he not guilty of those enormous crimes which were committed by others (which may be supposed, and yet the person not be in a state of grace) I say, when such an one _turneth away from his righteousness, and doth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doth_, that is, becomes openly vile and profligate; _shall he live?_ can he expect any thing else but that God should follow him with exemplary judgments, or that he should be involved in the common destruction? _In his sin that he hath sinned shall he die._ And on the other hand, ver. 27. _When the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness_; that is, they who have been guilty of these abominations shall reform their lives, or turn from their idolatry, murders, adulteries, oppressions, and other vile crimes, that the people in general were charged with, by the prophet, which are assigned as the reason of God’s sending this dreadful judgment of the captivity; I say, if there be such an instance of reformation, _he shall save his soul alive_; that is, either he shall be delivered from the captivity, or shall be preserved from those temporal judgments that either went before or followed after it. This reformation, and deliverance from these judgments, includes in it something less than saving grace, and a right to eternal life, which is inseparably connected with it, so that if nothing else be intended by the _righteous_ and _wicked man_; and if the judgments threatened, or their deliverance from them, in case of reformation, includes no more than this, it is evident, that it does not in the least suppose, that any true believer shall apostatize or fall from a state of grace. As we may distinguish between eternal death and temporal judgments; so we must distinguish between a person’s abstaining from the vilest abominations, as a means to escape these judgments; and his exercising those graces that accompany salvation. There may be an external reformation in those who have no special grace, if nothing farther be regarded than a person’s moral character, or inoffensive behaviour in the eye of the world. If we only consider him as abstaining from those sins which are universally reckoned disreputable among those who make any pretensions to religion, and in this respect he be denominated a righteous man, such an one may turn away from his righteousness and become immoral and profligate, and so be reckoned among the number of apostates: nevertheless he cannot be said to apostatize or fall from the grace of God, since moral virtue or the exercise of righteousness in our dealings with men is as much inferior to saving grace, as a form of godliness is to the power thereof.

2. As to the other scripture, mentioned in the objection, it is generally urged against us as an unanswerable argument, taken from the express words thereof, to prove the possibility of the saints’ apostacy; and our translation is charged with a wilful mistake, to serve a turn, and make the text speak what it never intended, since all who understand the original must allow that it ought to be rendered, _If he draw back_, which supposes that the just man may apostatize, or draw back unto perdition. To which it may be replied,

(1.) That though the words, according to the form in which they are laid down, contain a supposition, it does not infer the being or reality of the thing supposed[95]; but only this, that if such a thing should happen, it would be attended with what is laid down as a consequence thereof. This is very agreeable to our common mode of speaking, as when we say; if a virtuous person should commit a capital crime, he will fall under the lash of the law as much as though he had made no pretensions to virtue; nevertheless, it does not follow from hence, that such an one shall do it, or expose himself to this punishment; or, on the other hand, if a king should say to a criminal, as Solomon did to Adonijah, ‘If he will shew himself a worthy man, there shall not an hair of him fall to the earth,’ it cannot be concluded from hence, that he will behave himself so as that his life shall be secured to him. The proposition is true, as there is a just connexion between the supposition and the consequence; yet this does not argue that the thing supposed shall come to pass. Now to apply this to the scripture, under our present consideration; the proposition is doubtless true, that if the just man should draw back, so as to become a wicked man, if he should lose the principle of grace which was implanted in regeneration, and abandon himself to the greatest impieties, he would as certainly perish as though he had never experienced the grace of God; but it must not be inferred from hence, that God will suffer such an one, who is the object both of his love and care, thus to fall and perish, so that his soul should have no pleasure in him.

(2.) If we suppose the person here spoken of, whom we consider as a true believer, to draw back, we may distinguish between backsliding or turning aside from God, by the commission of very great sins; and apostacy. Or between drawing back, by being guilty of great crimes, so as to expose himself to sore judgments; and his drawing back to perdition. The just man in this text, is said, indeed, to draw back, but he is distinguished from one that draws back to perdition; as it is said in the following verse, ‘We are not of them who draw back to perdition, but of them that believe, to the saving of the soul.’ Such a drawing back as this, though it shall not end in perdition, inasmuch as the person shall be recovered and brought to repentance; yet it shall be attended with very great marks of God’s displeasure against believers, for those sins which they have committed, as well as others; accordingly, _his soul having no pleasure_ in them, denotes that he would, in various instances, reveal his wrath against relapsing believers, as a display of his holiness, who shall nevertheless be recovered and saved at last. If these things be duly considered, the objection seems to have no weight in it, though it should be allowed, that the words upon which it is principally founded, are not rightly translated.

However, I cannot see sufficient reason to set aside our translation, it being equally just to render the words, _if any man draw back_[96]; since the supplying the words _any man_, or _any one_, is allowed of in many other instances, both in the Old and New Testament. Therefore there is not the least incongruity in its being supplied in the text under our present consideration[97]; and, if it be, the sense that we give of it, will appear very agreeable to the context; accordingly the meaning is, ‘The just shall live by faith,’ or they who ‘know in themselves that they have in heaven a better and an enduring substance,’ as in one of the foregoing verses: These shall live by faith, but as for others who do not live by faith, having only a form or shew of religion, ‘whose manner is to forsake the assembling of themselves together,’ as in verse 25. these are inclined to _draw back_; therefore, let them know that _if any one_, or _whosoever draws back_, it will be at their peril; for it will be to their own _perdition_; yet saith the apostle, that true believers may not be discouraged by the apostacy of others, let them take notice of what is said in the following words, ‘We are not of them who draw back unto perdition, but of them that believe, to the saving of the soul.’ These things being duly considered, it will be sufficiently evident that this text does not militate against the doctrine of the saints’ perseverance.

_Obj._ 4. There is another objection brought against the doctrine we have been endeavouring to maintain, taken from what the apostle says in Heb. vi. 4, 5, 6. ‘It is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance, seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.’ The force of this objection lies in two things, _viz._ that they are described as total and final apostates; and also, that according to the account we have of their former conversation, they appear then to have been true believers.

_Answ._ This is thought, by some, who defend the doctrine of the saints’ perseverance, to be one of the most difficult objections that we generally meet with against it; especially they who cannot see how it is possible for a person to make such advances towards true godliness, and yet be no other than an hypocrite or formal professor, are obliged to take a method to set aside the force of the objection, which I cannot give into, namely, that when the apostle says, _It is impossible_ that such should be _renewed again to repentance_; the word _impossible_ denotes nothing else, but that the thing is exceeding difficult, not that they shall eventually perish; because they are supposed to be true believers; but their recovery after such a notorious instance of backsliding, shall be attended with difficulties so great that nothing can surmount, but the extraordinary power of God; and though he will recover them, yet they shall feel the smart thereof as long as they live; they shall be saved, yet so as by fire[98].

But notwithstanding the word _impossible_ may be sometimes taken for that which is very difficult, I cannot but conclude that the apostle is here speaking of that which is impossible, with respect to the event, and therefore, that he is giving the character of apostates who shall never be recovered. This appears, not only from the heinousness of the crime, as they are said _to crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame_; but from what is mentioned in the following verses, in which they are compared to _the earth that bringeth forth thorns and briars, which is rejected, and nigh unto cursing, whose end is to be burned_; and from their being distinguished from those who shall be saved, concerning whom the apostle was _persuaded better things, and things that accompany salvation_; therefore he is speaking here concerning a total and final apostasy.

But that this may not appear to militate against the doctrine we are maintaining, I shall endeavour to shew, that notwithstanding the character the apostle gives of the persons he here speaks of they were destitute of the truth of grace, and therefore nothing is said concerning them, but what a formal professor may attain to: That this may appear let it be considered,

1. That they are described as _once enlightened_; but this a person may be, and yet be destitute of saving faith. If by being _enlightened_ we understand their having been baptized, as some critics take the word, which was afterwards, in some following ages, used in that sense, it might easily be alleged, that a person might be baptized and yet not be a true believer: But since I question whether baptism was expressed by illumination in the apostles age[100], I would rather understand by it, their having been convinced of the truth of the gospel, or yielded an assent to the doctrines contained therein. Now this a person may do, and yet be destitute of saving faith, which is seated not barely in the understanding, but in the will, and therefore supposes him not only to be rightly informed, with respect to those things which are the object of faith, but to be internally and effectually called, from whence saving faith proceeds, as has been before observed.

2. They are said to have _tasted the good word of God_; which agrees with the character before given of those who had a temporary faith[101], who seemed, for a while, pleased with the word, and their affections were raised in hearing it; as Herod is said to have _heard John the Baptist gladly, and to have done many things_; like those whom our Saviour compares to the seed sown in stony ground, which soon sprang up, but afterwards withered away. This a person may do, and yet not have saving faith; for it is one thing to approve of, and be affected with the word, and another thing to mix it with that faith which accompanies salvation. A person may entertain those doctrines contained in the word which relate to a future state of blessedness with pleasure; as all men desire to be happy, and at the same time be far from practising the duties of self-denial, taking up the cross, and following Christ, mortifying indwelling sin, and exercising an intire dependance upon, and resignation to him in all things: This contains much more than what is expressed by _tasting the good word of God_.

3. They are farther described as having _tasted the heavenly gift, and being made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and of the powers of the world to come_; all which expressions, I humbly conceive, carry in them no more than this, that they had been enabled to work miracles, or that they had a faith of miracles, which has been before described[102], and proved to fall very short of saving faith[103]. Therefore these characters given of them do not argue that they were true believers, and consequently the objection, which depends on the supposition that they were, is of no force to prove that saints may totally or finally fall from grace.

_Obj._ 5. The next objection against the doctrine we have been maintaining, is taken from Heb. x. 29. _Of how much sorer punishment suppose ye shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the spirit of grace._ The crime here spoken of is of the heinous nature, and the greatest punishment is said to be inflicted for it: Now, inasmuch as these are described as having been _sanctified by the blood of the covenant_, it follows, that they were true believers, and consequently true believers may apostatize, and fall short of salvation.

_Answ._ The force of the objection lies principally in those words, _the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified_; which expression is taken, by divines, in two different senses.

1. Some take the word _he_ in the same sense as it is taken in the objection, as referring to the apostate; and then the difficulty which occurs, is how such an one could be said to be sanctified by the blood of the covenant, and yet not regenerate, effectually called, or a true believer: To solve this, they suppose, that by _sanctification_ we are only to understand a relative holiness, which such have who are made partakers of the common grace of the gospel: Thus it is said, _Israel was holiness unto the Lord_, Jer. ii. 3. or, as the apostle Peter expresses it, _an holy nation_, 1 Pet. ii. 9. as they were God’s people by an external covenant relation, and by an explicit consent to be governed by those laws which he gave them when they first became a church, Exod. xxiv. 3. and publicly avouched him to be their God, and he avouched them to be his peculiar people, which was done upon some solemn occasions, Deut. xxvi. 17, 18. Nevertheless, many of them were destitute of the special grace of sanctification, as it contains in it a thorough and universal change of heart and life. Moreover, they suppose that this privilege of being God’s people, by an external covenant-relation, together with all these common gifts and graces that attend it, was purchased by, and founded on the blood of Christ, which is called _the blood of the covenant_, inasmuch as he was _given for a covenant of the people_, Isa. xlii. 6. and pursuant hereunto, he shed his blood to procure for them the external as well as the saving blessings of the covenant of grace; the former of these, the persons here described as apostates, are supposed to have been made partakers of, as the apostle says, _To them pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises_, Rom. ix. 4. they worshipped him in all his ordinances, as those whom the prophet speaks of, _who seek him daily, and delight to know his ways, as a nation that did righteousness, and forsook not the ordinance of their God; they ask of him the ordinances of justice, and take delight in approaching to God_; and yet these things were not done by faith, Isa. lviii. 2. In this respect persons may be sanctified, and yet afterwards forfeit, neglect, despise and forsake these ordinances, and lose the external privileges of the covenant of grace, which they once had, and so become apostates. This is the most common method used to solve the difficulty contained in the objection. But I would rather acquiesce in another way, which may be taken to account for the sense of those words, _the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified_. Therefore, let it be considered,

2. That the word _he_ may be understood, not as referring to the apostate, but our Saviour, who is spoken of immediately before: thus the apostate is said to ‘trample under foot the Son of God, and count the blood of the covenant wherewith He, that is, Christ, ‘was sanctified, an unholy thing.’ That this sense may appear just, it may be observed, that Christ was sanctified or set apart by the Father, to perform all the branches of his Mediatorial office, in two respects.

(1.) As he was fore-ordained or appointed, by him, to come into the world to shed his blood for the redemption of his people: thus his undertaking to redeem them is called his sanctifying, or devoting himself to perform this work, as he says, ‘For their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth,’ John xvii. 19. this he did in pursuance of the eternal transaction between the Father and him, relating hereunto. But it will be said, that this was antecedent to his dying for them; and therefore, properly speaking, he could not be said, in this respect, to be _sanctified by the blood of the covenant_; therefore, to this we may add,

(2.) That he was also sanctified, or set apart by the Father, to apply the work of redemption after he had purchased it; which sanctification was, in the most proper sense, the result of his shedding his blood, which was the blood of the covenant; so that as he was ‘brought again from the dead,’ as the apostle speaks, ‘through the blood of the everlasting covenant,’ Heb. xiii. 20. all the blessings which he applies to his people as the consequence hereof, are the result of his being sanctified, or set apart to carry on and perfect the work of our salvation, the foundation whereof was laid in his blood.

Moreover, that they who are here described as apostates, had not before this, the grace of faith, is evident from the context, inasmuch as they are distinguished from true believers. The apostle seems to speak of two sorts of persons, to wit, some who had cast off the ordinances of God’s worship, ‘forsaking the assembling of themselves together,’ who are distinguished from those whom he dehorts from this sin, who _had_ the grace of _faith_, whereby they were enabled to ‘draw near to God in full assurance thereof, having their hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and their bodies washed with pure water;’ concerning these he says, ‘We are not of them who draw back to perdition, but of them who believe to the saving of the soul,’ chap. x. 39. Therefore we must conclude that others are intended in the text under our present consideration, who were not true believers, and consequently it does not from hence appear that such may totally, or finally, fall from a state of grace.

The apostates spoken of in this and the foregoing objection, were probably some among the Jews, to whom the gospel was preached, who embraced the Christian faith, being convinced by those miracles which were wrought for that purpose, but afterwards revolted from it, and were more inveterately set against Christ and the gospel than they had been before they made this profession; and accordingly as they had formerly approved of the crimes of those who crucified Christ, in which respect they are said to have crucified him; now they do, in the same sense, crucify him afresh. And as they had been made partakers of the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost; afterwards they openly blasphemed him, and this was done with spite and malice. These texts therefore not only contain a sad instance of the apostasy of some, but prove that they were irrecoverably lost; and this comes as near the account we have in the gospels of the unpardonable sin, as any thing mentioned in scripture: nevertheless, what has been said to prove that they never were true believers, is a sufficient answer to this and the foregoing objection.

_Objec._ 6. Another objection against the doctrine of the saints’ perseverance, is taken from 2 Pet. ii. 20-22. _For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world, through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome; the latter end is worse with them than the beginning_; and they are said in the following verse, to _turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them_; which is compared to the _dog turning to his own vomit again, and the sow that was washed, to her wallowing in the mire_.

_Answ._ To this it may be replied, That though every one must conclude, that the persons, whom the apostle here speaks of, plainly appear to be apostates; yet there is nothing in their character which argues that they apostatized, or fell from the truth of grace; and it is only such whom we are at present speaking of. It may be observed, that the apostle is so far from including these apostates in the number of those to whom he writes this, with the foregoing epistle, whom he describes _as elect, according to the fore-knowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ_, and as having been _begotten again unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, to an inheritance reserved for them in heaven_, and as such, who should be _kept by the power of God, through faith, unto salvation_, 1 Pet. i. 2-5. that he plainly distinguishes them from them. For in verse 1, of this chapter, from whence it is taken, it is said, ‘There shall be false teachers among you, and many shall follow their pernicious ways;’ he does not say many, who are now of your number, but many who shall be joined to the church, when these false teachers arise. These persons, indeed, are represented as making a great shew of religion, by which they gained reputation among some professors, whom they seduced which otherwise they could not have done; and therefore it is said, ‘They had escaped the pollutions of the world, through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,’ and that they had ‘known the way of righteousness.’ Such might indeed be joined to the church afterwards; but they did not now belong to it; and what is said concerning them, amounts to no more than an external visible reformation, together with their having attained the knowledge of Christ and divine things; so that they were enlightened in the doctrines of the gospel; though they made it appear, by the methods they used to deceive others, that they had not experienced the grace of the gospel themselves, and therefore they fell away from their profession, and turned aside from the faith, which once they preached. It is one thing for a formal professor, who makes a great show of religion, to turn aside from his profession, to all excess of riot; and another thing to suppose a true believer can do so, and that to such a degree as to continue therein; this the grace of God will keep him from.

_Objec._ 7. Another objection against the doctrine of the saints’ perseverance, is taken from the parable of the debtor and creditor, in Matt, xviii. 26, _&c._ in which it is said, ‘The servant fell down and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the Lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt;’ but afterwards, upon his treating one of his fellow-servants, who owed him a very inconsiderable sum, with great severity, his lord exacted the debt of him, which he had before forgiven him, and so _delivered_ him _to the tormentors_, till he should pay all that was due to him: ‘So likewise,’ it is said, ‘shall my heavenly Father do unto you, if ye, from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses;’ from whence it is inferred, that a person may fall from a justified state, or that God may forgive sin at one time, and yet be provoked to alter his resolution, and inflict the punishment that is due to it, at another; which is altogether inconsistent with the doctrine of the saints’ perseverance in grace.

_Answ._ In answer to this we must observe, that our Saviour’s design in his parables, is not that every word or circumstance contained in them, should be applied to signify what it seems to import, but there is some truth in general intended to be illustrated thereby, which is principally to be regarded therein. Thus in the parable of the _judge_, in Luke xviii. 2, &c. ‘which feared not God, neither regarded man,’ who was moved, by a widow’s importunity, to ‘avenge her of her adversary;’ which after a while, he resolved to do, because the widow _troubled him_. This is applied to ‘God’s avenging his elect, who cry day and night unto him;’ where we must observe, that it is only in this circumstance that the parable is to be applied to them without any regard had to the injustice of the judge, or his being uneasy, by reason of the importunity which the widow exprest in pleading her cause with him.

Again, in the parable of the _steward_, in Luke xvi. 1, &c. who being accused for having _wasted his lord’s goods_; and apprehending that he should be soon turned out of the stewardship, he takes an unjust method to gain the favour of his lord’s debtors, by remitting a part of what they owed him, that by this means they might be induced to shew kindness to him when he was turned out of his service. It is said indeed, verse 8. that ‘the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had acted wisely;’ whereas, our Saviour does not design, in the account he gives of his injustice, to give the least countenance to it, as though it were to be imitated by us; nor by his lord’s commending him as acting wisely for himself, does he intend that it is lawful or commendable for wicked men to pursue the like measures to promote their future interest. But the only thing in which this parable is applied, is, that we might learn from hence, that ‘the children of this world are, in their generation wiser than the children of light;’ and that men ought to endeavour, without the least appearance of injustice, to gain the friendship of others, by using what they have in the world, in such a way, as that they may be induced, out of gratitude for those favours, which they conferred upon them, to shew respect to them; but principally, that in performing what was really their duty, they might have ground to hope that they shall be approved of God, and received into everlasting habitations.

Now to apply this rule to the parable from whence the objection is taken, we must consider, that the design hereof is not to signify that God changes his mind, as men do, by forgiving persons at one time, and afterwards condemning them, as though he did not know, when he extended this kindness to them, how they would behave towards others, or whether they would improve or forfeit this privilege; since to suppose this would be contrary to the divine perfections. Therefore the only design of the parable is to shew, that they who now conclude that God has forgiven them, ought to forgive others, or else they will find themselves mistaken at last: and though according to the tenor of the divine dispensations, or the revealed will of God, which is our only rule of judging concerning this matter, they think that they are in a justified state, it will appear, that the debt which they owed was not cancelled, but shall be exacted of them to the utmost, in their own persons; so that all that can be proved from hence is, that a man may fall from, or lose those seeming grounds, which we had to conclude that his sins were forgiven: but we are not to suppose that our Saviour intends hereby that God’s secret purpose, relating to the forgiveness of sin, can be changed; or that he, who is really freed from condemnation, at one time, may fall under it at another: therefore, what is said in this parable, does not in the least give countenance to this objection, or overthrow the doctrine we are maintaining.

_Objec._ 8. There is another objection, taken from what the apostle Paul says concerning himself, in 1 Cor. ix. 27. _I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection, lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a cast-away._ Now it is certain that the apostle was a true believer; yet he concludes, that if he did not behave himself so as to subdue or keep under his corrupt passions, but should commit those open scandalous crimes, which they would prompt him to, he should, in the end, become a cast-away, that is, apostatize from God, and be rejected by him.