June 25, 2015

John Foxe (1517–1587) on God’s Common and Special Love

“The second article: ‘Christ doth more love a predestinate man being sinful, than any reprobate in what grace possible soever he be.’ Answer: My words are in the fourth chapter of my book entitled, ‘Of the Church:’ ‘And it is evident that God doth more love any predestinate being sinful, than any reprobate in what grace soever he be for the time; forasmuch as he willeth that the predestinate shall have perpetual blessedness, and the reprobate shall have eternal fire.’ Wherefore God partly infinitely loving them both as his creatures, yet he doth more love the predestinate, because he giveth them greater grace, or a greater gift, that is to say, life everlasting, which is greater and more excellent than grace only, according to present justice. And the third article of those articles before, soundeth very near unto this: that the predestinate cannot fall from grace. For they have a certain radical grace rooted in them, although they be deprived of the abundant grace for a time. These things are true in the compound sense.”

Bio:
DNB

June 18, 2015

Isaac Watts’ (1674–1748) Dualistic View of the Atonement

Yet further, one Christian may delight more to fix his Eye and Hope on Christ, as a Surety or Representative of his Elect, or of those whom he certainly and finally saves, and on that account he suffered Death particularly in their room and stead, and secured to them certain Deliverance and Salvation; yet he cannot therefore affirm, that Christ did not, in any Sense, die for all Men, as a general Friend of Man, or suffer Death for their Good; nor can he say, that the Benefits of his Death do not any way reach to all Mankind. Another perhaps will say, since all are dead, he died for all as a common Mediator betwixt God and Man, or as a general Benefactor to procure conditional Salvation for all Men, and offer it to them if they are willing to come to him and receive it; but he cannot say, that he was not a proper Surety, or Representative of his Elect, whereby he has secured certain Salvation to them only: For as I have shown in former Papers, that he by his Righteousness and Death has directly and absolutely procured this Salvation for his Elect, as their Head and Representative, but yet he has also procured Salvation, with all the Glories of it, conditionally, for the rest of Mankind, upon which Foundation these Blessings are offer’d to all Men in the Gospel.
Isaac Watts, Orthodoxy and Charity United (Boston, N.E.: Reprinted and sold by Rogers and Fowle in Queen-Street., 1749), 184–185. Also in “Orthodoxy and Charity United,” in The Works of the Rev. Isaac Watts, D.D., 9 vols. (Leeds: Printed by Edward Baines, 1813), 180.

Bio:  

June 12, 2015

Benjamin Wadsworth (1670–1737) on God’s Mercy, Patience, and Final Judgment

In the day of God’s Patience there’s ground to Pray with hope of success (God regards the Prayer of the destitute, and will not despise their Prayer) but when God’s abused Patience is ended, all the Prayers of Sinners will be disregarded. The wicked rich Man in Hell, tormented in those scorching Flames, begg’d for as much Water to cool his Tongue, as could hang on the tip of a Mans Finger; what a small pittance was this? He did not ask to be taken out of Hell, not ask to have those Flames quenched; not ask to have a running River, a living Fountain always by him to cool and refresh him; no, he ask’d but a small matter, a drop of Water, and that when he was in utmost necessity too, and yet ‘twas deny’d him, Luk. 16 Chap. Oh believe it, God has not one drop of Mercy for the finally obstinate and rebellious Sinner. In this World, God’s Mercy (as it were) goes a begging to them, ‘tis brought to their very Doors and offer’d to them; Christ stands at the Door and knocks for entrance. They actually enjoy many outward Mercies, and Spiritual Eternal Mercies are offered to them and urged on them; but when God’s Patience is ended, let them Cry and Pray as long as they will, not the least drop of Mercy shall be obtained for them. And as they shall not have the least drop of Mercy, so they shall have Wrath and Misery without mixture; Pain without mitigation or intermission. They shall be cast into outer darkness, where there’s weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth: they shall be cut asunder; shall be plagu’d with the Worm that never dies, the Fire that never can be quenched, and that among Damned Devils forever. Truly, no Tongue can declare, no Heart conceive the greatness of this Misery. Oh, it’s a fearful thing to fall into the Hands of the living God, Heb. 10.31. Who knoweth the Power of his Anger! None can deliver out of his Hands; he’ll punish his obstinate Enemies with Everlasting Destruction.
Benjamin Wadsworth, “Sermon IX: GOD’S BOW Bent, and SWORD Drawn against the Wicked,” in Twelve Single Sermons on Various Subjects (Boston: Printed by B. Green, for N. Buttolph, B. Eliot, S. Gerrish, and D. Henchman, sold at their shops, 1717), 183–185.

Bio:

Other men within the Augustinian tradition who use the metaphor of God begging are the following:

Augustine (Early Church Father), Hugh Latimer (Early English Reformer), Isaac Ambrose (Puritan), Daniel Burgess (Puritan), Jeremiah Burroughs (Westminster divine), Richard Baxter (Puritan), Joseph Caryl (Westminster divine), Thomas Case (Puritan), Stephen Charnock (Puritan), John Collinges (Puritan), John Flavel (Puritan), Theophilus Gale (Puritan), William Gearing (Puritan), Andrew Gray (Puritan), William Gurnall (Puritan), Robert Harris (Westminster divine), Thomas Larkham (Puritan), Thomas Manton (Puritan), John Murcot (Puritan), George Newton (Puritan), Anthony Palmer (Puritan), Edward Reynolds (Westminster divine), John Richardson (Puritan), Samuel Rutherford (Westminster divine), John Shower (Puritan), Richard Sibbes (Puritan), Sydrach Simpson (Westminster divine), William Strong (Westminster divine), George Swinnock (Puritan), John Trapp (Puritan), Ralph Venning (Puritan), Nathaniel Vincent (Puritan), Thomas Watson (Puritan), Samuel Willard, George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, Solomon Stoddard, Samuel Davies, Ralph Erskine, Charles Spurgeon, Thomas Chalmers, Walter Chantry, Erroll Hulse, John MacArthur and Fred Zaspel.

Samuel Willard (1640–1707) on God’s Common and Special Love

When the Scripture attributes love to God, it points to his good will in purposing good to be bestowed on them, and making them that are appointed thereto to partake therein: and this love is looked upon to be greater or less, according to the things that are willed in it, and the benefit received by them: and on this account, God is said to love some of his Creatures more than others, in that he hath done more for them, and prepared greater blessings to bestow on them. There is a common love of God, in which the whole Creation is a sharer, appearing in his benignity in bestowing on them these favours by which they are preserved, supplied, and comforted; to this is to be referred that, Acts 14 17 He did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness; and Chap 17 25 He giveth to all life, and breath, and all things. But then there is a special love which God hath for some of his Creatures, and that was in appointing, providing, and opening this fountain for them, from which they may derive everlasting life. This therefore is mentioned in the Gospel with an Emphasis, as if it were the only love, 1 Joh. 4 9.
“...when God manifesteth his benignity to the Creature, we conceive him, in his so doing, to act as a cause by Counsel, and so ascribe it to his Benevolence, and call it his love. And from this consideration, there is a divers love that is assigned to him, according to the different effects of his good will, discerned in the fruits of his Beneficence to the Subject of it. There is a common love attributed to him, wherein the good and the bad do promiscuously partake; and it appears in that Goodness of his which he confers upon them, wherein he gives them large tastes of his bounty; and to this love we are pointed in, Psal. 145.9. The Lord is good to all and his tender mercies are over all his works. And Acts 14.17. He left not himself without witness in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness. And there is an Especial love of his that we are told of, which he bears only to some, and in comparison with which others are said to be hated, according to Rom. 9.13 Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated; and it appears in those peculiar favours which he hath laid in for, and bestows upon them; of which we have such observations, Joh. 3.16. God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, &c. 1 Joh. 4 9. In this was the love of God manifested towards us, because God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him...”
Samuel Willard, Love’s Pedigree. Or A Discourse Shewing the Grace of Love in a Believer to be of A Divine Original (Boston, in N.E.: Printed by B. Green, and J. Allen. Sold by Benjamin Eliot, at his shop under the west end of the town house, 1700), 7–8.

Bio:  

June 11, 2015

Nathaniel Appleton (1693–1784) on the Will of God and the Death of Christ

Appleton wrote:
But then, I would go on further to say, that God wills the Salvation of all Men, as he has done and is doing those Things which indicate such a Willingness, or are outward, open, and manifest Tokens of his Willingness that all Men should be saved. As particularly,

1. In the all sufficient Saviour he provided for sinful Man.

God did not provide a Saviour who was able only to save a few of the fallen Race; but One who was able to save every Son and Daughter of Adam. I am not now considering the Extent of Christ’s Redemption, as to the divine Intention and Design, or as to the real Event of it; for this is a secret Thing, and belongs not to us, but to God. But what I am now considering, is the Extent of his Merits, and of his Power; and considered in this Respect, it is universal. Of such infinite Virtue are the Merits of Christ’s Blood, that it is sufficient to take away the Sin of the whole World. If every Man in the whole World should be saved, there would not need any other Sacrifice than Christ has already made of himself; and therefore with Respect to the Sufficiency of Atonement, Christ may be said to have died for all; to have tasted Death for every Man; and to be the Propitiation for our Sins, and not for ours only, but for the Sins of the whole World. Moreover there is not only such a Sufficiency of Merit in Christ, but a Sufficiency of Power: For all Power is given to him in Heaven, and in Earth: That as his Blood was sufficient to wash away the Guilt of the whole World; so his Power is sufficient to subdue the strongest Habits of Sin, and bring us over to a willing Subjection to him, and to his Gospel. So that there is every Thing in him necessary to render him a complete All-sufficient Saviour to the whole World of Mankind: Surely He is able to save to the uttermost. And now this may be considered as a Token of God’s Willingness that all Men should be saved: For when God has provided a Saviour able to save the whole World; what are we led to argue from thence, but that God is willing that all should be saved? Who can think that God is unwilling to have the Malady healed, for which he has been at infinite Cost to provide a sovereign Remedy? And that when he has spread a Plaister large enough for the whole Sore, he should be unwilling to have it applied?
Nathaniel Appleton, How God wills the salvation of all men; and their coming to the knowledge of the truth, as the means thereof. Illustrated in a sermon from I. Tim. ii. 4. Preached in Boston, March 27. 1753. at the ordination of the Rev. Mr. Stephen Badger, as a missionary with a special reference to the Indians at Natick.: Published at the unanimous desire of the ecclesiastical council convened on that occasion; and of other hearers. (Boston: Printed and sold by S. Kneeland Queen-Street, 1753), 7–8. Henry Scudder (c.1585–1652) sounds similar when he said, “And it was so intended by Christ, that the plaster should be as large as the sore, and that there should be no defect in the remedy, that is, in the price, or sacrifice of himself offered upon the cross, by which man should be saved, but that all men, and each particular man, might in that respect become salvable by Christ.”

Bio:
Appleton, Nathaniel, 1693–1784.
Born, 1693; graduated at Harvard, 1712; ordained to the Ministry, 1717; Fellow of Harvard, 1717–1779; died, 1784.

Nathaniel Appleton, D.D., Fellow of Harvard, was born in Ipswich, Massachusetts, December 9, 1693. He studied at Harvard, where he received his Master’s degree in 1712, and then studied theology. His ordination to the Ministry took place October 9, 1717, and he succeeded the Rev. William Brattle as Congregationalist minister in Cambridge. He was an able preacher and ranked among the foremost theologians of the day. For sixty-two years, 1717–1779, he was one of the Corporation of Harvard, and occupies an honorable place among the Fellows of that Institution. Some of Mr. Appleton’s sermons were published prior to his death. He died in Cambridge, February 9, 1784.

Nathaniel Appleton (1693–1784), of Cambridge, Massachusetts, the son of John Appleton and Elizabeth Rogers, was born in Ipswich and was an American Congregationalist minister. He was the nephew of President Leverett of Harvard and a graduate of Harvard. He was also chaplain of the 1st Provincial Congress of Massachusetts and minister of the First Church in Cambridge for sixty-six years. His meeting-house opened its doors and extended its kind offices to the soldiers mustered around it; There the 1st and 2nd Provincial Congress of Massachusetts convened, October 17, 1774, and February 1, 1775; there Washington and his officers worshiped; there the Constitution of Massachusetts was framed in 1779.

June 10, 2015

Edward Reynolds (1599–1676) on Restraining and Renewing Grace

For clearing this Exception we must know that there are other causes besides the power and kingdom of the spirit of Christ, which may work a partial abstinence in some sins, and conformity in some duties.

First, the Power of a general restraining Grace, which I suppose is meant in Gods with-holding Abimelech from touching Sarah. As there are general Gifts of the Spirit in regard of illumination, so likewise in order to conversation and practice. It is said that Christ beholding the young man, Loved him, and that even when he was under the reign of Covetousness. He had nothing from himself worthy of love, therefore something, though more general, it was which the spirit had wrought in him. Suppose we his ingenuity, morality, care of Salvation, or the like. As Abraham gave portions to Ishmael, but the inheritance to Isaac: so doth the Lord on the children of the flesh and of the bond woman bestow common gifts, but the Inheritance and Adoption is for the Saints, his choicest Jewels are for the King’s Daughter. There is great difference betwixt Restraining and Renewing Grace; the one only charms and chains up sin, the other crucifies and weakens it, whereby the vigor of it is not withheld only, but abated: the one turns the motions and stream of the heart to another channel, the other keeps it in bounds only, though still it run its natural course; the one is contrary to the Reign, the other only to the Rage of sin. And now these graces being so differing, needs must the abstaining from sins, or amendment of life according as it riseth from one or other, be likewise exceeding different.
Edward Reynolds, Three Treatises: Of the Vanity of the Creature. The Sinfulness of Sin. The Life of Christ. (London: Imprinted by Felix Kyngston, and are to be sold by Henry Curteyne, 1631), 288. Also in “The Sinfulness of Sin,” in The Whole Works of the Right Rev. Edward Reynolds, D.D., 6 vols. (Ligonier, PA: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 1992), 1:267–268.

Bio:  
Wiki 

June 9, 2015

William Gouge (1575–1653) on Restraining and Renewing Grace

Object. The best Saints in all ages have transgressed in many things.

Answ. Their sins though grievous, have not willfully in open rebellion against Christ been committed, but they have slipped from them partly through their own weakness, and partly through the violence of some temptation. So as that which the Apostle saith of himself, may be applied to all that are of the body of Christ, That which I do I allow not: Now then is it no more I that do it, but the sin that dwelleth in me.

This extent is a good proof of the truth of subjection, for herein lieth a main difference betwixt the upright, and the hypocrite; yea betwixt restraining and renewing grace. That restraining grace which is in many hypocrites stirreth them to do many things which Christ commandeth, if at least they cross not their honour, profit, ease, and the like. Herod that notorious hypocrite did many things. None that beareth the name of the Church, but will be subject in somethings. But none but the upright, who are indeed renewed by the sanctifying spirit of Christ, will in all things make Christ’s will their rule, and in every thing hold close to it, preferring it before their pleasure, profit, preferment, or any other outward allurement. They who so do, give good evidence that they are of the body of Christ, and may rest upon it, that Christ is their Saviour.
William Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, Eight Treatises (London: Printed by George Miller, for Edward Brewster, and are to be sold at the signe of the Bible, neere the North doore of Saint Pauls Church, 1634), 41–42.
1. Object. Religion and grace consisteth not in good manners: many that have not a spark of God’s fear in their hearts, are able to carry themselves in their outward behaviour very orderly and mannerly.

Answ. Though grace consist not wholly in it, yet cannot grace well be without it: it is a great ornament and comeliness thereunto. And though mannerliness may be severed from a fear of God, yet God’s fear will not be severed from it. Restraining grace may be in him who hath no renewing grace: but renewing grace presupposeth restraining grace, even as reason presupposeth sense, though sense may be without reason. If such as fear not God can carry themselves comely and mannerly, what a shame is it for such as seem to fear God, not to do so? shall not those be a witness against these?
Ibid., 539.
3. In showing mercy to man for the Lord’s sake, even towards his name, resteth a main difference betwixt restraining and renewing grace: betwixt that love which a natural man showeth, and a man regenerate. For renewing grace moveth a man regenerate to do the things that he doth to man, toward the name of God.
William Gouge, A Learned and Very Useful Commentary on the Whole Epistle to the Hebrews (London: Printed by A.M. T.W. and S.G. for Joshua Kirton, and are to be sold at his Shop at the Sign of the Kings Arms in Pauls Church-yard, 1655), 2:52. See also 2:371.
2. Obj. Many Heathen and unregenerate men have been of a quiet and peaceable disposition, and have followed peace.

Answ.
1. That disposition which is in heathen, or in other natural and unregenerate persons, was but a mere seeming disposition: it had but a show of the grace or virtue. It could not come from true love, but rather from self-love, aiming at by-respects. This caveat of doing no wrong except provoked, shows that their peaceableness was no true virtue. A fierce dog may be quiet till he be provoked.

2. Though the Spirit renewed not such men, yet it restrained them for the good of polities and societies, which otherwise could not have stood. God’s Spirit by restraining grace moved the spirit of Cyrus, Darius, and sundry of those Kings under whom the Jews were, to afford them peace. So were sundry Heathen Emperors moved to Christians.
Ibid., 3:308.

Bio:

Thomas Draxe (d.1618) on General and Special Grace

Qu. If one man by nature be not better than another, how then do they differ?
A. In men mere natural and unconverted, God, for the upholding and preserving of Common-wealths and human societies, bestoweth general and restraining grace more upon one than another.

Secondly, they do or may differ in outward dignity and privileges, as the Jews much excelled the Gentiles; but otherwise the special grace and mercy of our God, maketh the main difference between the Elect and the Reprobate. For the one hath in time renewing and saving grace communicated unto him; but the other is utterly denied it.
Thomas Draxe, The World’s Resurrection, Or the General Calling of the Jews (London: Printed by G. Eld, and are to be sold by Robert Boulton and John Wright, 1608), 109–110.
Quest. Touching the graces of God if they be never taken away, why doth God so often deprive men of them, that formerly had them?

Ans. First, they are common and temporal gifts, either of nature, policy, or else of illumination and outward profession only, that are common to God’s children with reprobates, these God doth strip and deprive men of many times for their unthankfulness, and to discover their unsoundness and hypocrisy.

Secondly, because men (who are commonly Reprobates) always neglect, contemn, and abuse them, & thus they quench and put out the holy spirit, and what light soever was offered unto them, and whatsoever knowledge and grace of God was bestowed upon them, it dieth in them by little and little: for God in his justice taketh his talent from them, as he did from Saul and Judas. But for those peculiar endowments of God’s elect which are linked and chained inseparably together, such as predestination, vocation, justification, and glorification, these are given to the Godly in fee [sic] simple, and are never taken away from them.
Ibid., 103.

Bio:

Notes: There are also a couple of instances in The lambes spouse or the heavenly bride (London: By G. Eld, dwelling in Fleete-lane, at the signe of the Printers Presse, 1608) where he speaks of “common graces,” as well as in The earnest of our inheritance (London: Imprinted by Felix Kingston for George Norton, 1613). Thomas Fuller states that Draxe translated the works of William Perkins into Latin, for the Geneva edition, 2 vols. fol., 1611-18. Compare William Perkins on restraining grace and renewing grace here (click).

May 10, 2015

Richard Baxter (1615–1691) on Christ’s Prayer in John 17

The fourth Crimination.

C. “They make Christ to die for those that he would not pray for, Joh. 17. ‘I pray not for the world, but for those that thou hast given me out of the world’”---

B. He maketh himself to die for them. It is ofter and plainer said that he died for all, than it is, that he prayed not for all. And many plain Texts, yea the scope of the Gospel, must not be reduced to your feigned sense of one obscurer Text.

2. But doth not the Text tell us, that he died not for the world, as it tells us, that he prayed not for them? Or doth it tell us, that he died for no more than he prayed for? Or rather are not these your own Inventions?

3. But where doth the Text say, that Christ never prayed for any but the Elect? yea, or that he prayed not at all for the world, though he put not up that particular prayer for the world? Look on the Text, and you will see that he speaketh there only of the Disciples that followed him on Earth; And that he prayed not in that Petition for all his Elect only; And therefore he after addeth, vers. 20. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe in me through their word. And what was the prayer?  [That they may be one, and kept from the evil of the world,] which is a blessing peculiar to his Disciples. But it is manifest, that Christ had other prayers for the world, even for many ungodly men; yea, for Reprobates. For, 1. On the Cross he prayeth for his Persecutors, Father, forgive them: And it is mens own invention to say that he meaneth none but the Elect: We must not unnecessarily limit where the Word limiteth not. And Stephen made Christ his Pattern. And it is gross fiction to say that Stephen prayed for none but the Elect.

C. “Doth not Christ say, That his Father heard him always? and can you imagine that he prayed for that which God denied him?”

B. 2. My next Answer should have prevented that Objection, which is, that what God giveth to the World for Christ’s sake, that Christ may well be said to pray for; For it is the fruit of his Mediation. But God giveth much Pardon, and many Mercies to the World, for Christ’s sake. 1. He giveth them much Actual pardon for temporal punishments for Christ’s sake. All the Life, Health, Time, Gospel, Means and Mercies, which ever he giveth them, are such as deserved full punishment would have deprived them of: And therefore they are all acts of executive pardon of that punishment.

3. And this very Chapter containeth a prayer for the World, viz. vers. 21, 23. That the World may believe, and know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them.--- If you say that by the World here is meant only the Elect; I answer, 1. Your word is no Proof. 2. That they are prayed for, to believe and know, &c. is no proof: For many did believe that God sent Christ that yet were not saved. This soundeth but as a common Act of Faith. 3. And note, that here the world is contradistinguished, not only from Apostles, but those (after-mentioned) that should believe by their word; and it is prayed, That the world may know that God loveth those that believe in him: which may extend both to the Conversion of such as then are unconverted, and to the conviction of others, such as are common members of the visible Church (at least): As the Spirit is sent to convince the world of Sin, and Righteousness, and Judgment.

4. And it is not to be granted you without proof, that by the World is meant all Reprobates as such: For Judas is before distinguished from the World (as one given to Christ) when yet he was a Reprobate: But either it may be the World of present Unbelievers, whom Christ prayeth for else-where, though not there: Or the World of final professed Infidels and Enemies of the Church, as distinct from both Elect and Reprobate in the Church. And several expressions of Christ’s before of the Worlds hating and persecuting his Apostles, seem not applicable to every Hypocrite, who prophesieth and casteth out of Devils in his Name, and perhaps suffereth for his Truth, and excellently defendeth it, and hath some love to Believers.
Richard Baxter, Catholick Theologie (London: Printed by Robert White, for Nevill Simmons at the Princes Arms in St. Pauls Church-yard, 1675), Book II, 68–69.

Bio: