I. Touching Guilt of Sin.

• 1. Power to be Subdued.
• 2 Filth to be Purged.
• 3. Guilt to be Pardoned.

Guilt of Sin is two-fold.

• 1. Fundamental, In­trinsecal, Habitual. which is Desert of Punish­ment.
• 2. Formal, Extrinse­cal, Actual. which is Oblication to Punish­ment.

The first I call Intrinsecal Guilt, because arising from within, from the [Page 4] very Nature of Sin. And the Se­cond, Extrinsecal Guilt, because ari­sing from without, from the Penal Constitution of God. As also the First, Habitual, Fundamental Guilt, because the Foundation of that Penal Constitution or Threatning of God, which formeth the Second, Actual, Formal Guilt.

As the Punishment to which, and Threatning according to which, Sin binds; So is the Formal, Actual Guilt, or Obligation it self, two-fold;

• 1. Legal.
• 2. Evangelical.

1. Legal Guilt, according to Legal unallay'd Threatning, binding over to Legal Punishment, the mere Wrathful Dispensation of God, as a Judge, aiming at the Satisfaction of his Justice.

2. Gospel Guilt, according to Go­spel allay'd Threatning, binding o­ver to Gospel Chastisement, a mixt Dispensation of the Justice and Mer­cy of God, as a Father, aiming as at the Vindication of his Fatherly Authority and Honour, so at the [Page 5] Correction and Amendment of his Child.

• The 1. is the Guilt of Condemned Prisoners out of Christ
• The 2. is the Guilt of Justified Persons in Christ

For one of these Guilts, Sin deriv­eth every where, and but one of them any where, according to the respective Condition or State of the Person, in whom it resides, or by whom it is committed.

II. Touching Pardon of Guilt.

As the Guilt of Sin, is its Obliga­tion to Punishment, so is the Pardon of Sin, the Dissolution of that Obli­gation; and as the Obligation is two-fold, Legal or Evangelical, so also is the Dissolution or Pardon.

The distinction of Legal or Gospel Pardon, doth here manifestly pro­ceed according to the distinction of the Subject-Matter, or thing Par­doned, Legal or Gospel Guilt of Sin; otherwise for the Original or Rise of it, all (even Legal) Pardon is of Gospel Grace.

[Page 6] First, Legal-Pardon of Legal Guilt, which is the Dissolution of Legal Obligation to Legal Punishment for Legal Sin, and is twofold.

1. Fundamental in Christ (as a Common Person) of all the elect be­fore Faith; which lieth in Christs making full Satisfaction for their Sins, Meriting Faith for them, and utmost Advantage of such his Satis­faction upon their Faith.

2. Actual of all the Elect in Christ upon their Faith. This Actual Pardon, being nothing else, but the Actual Possession in their own Persons, of their Fundamental Pardon in the Person of Christ.

This Actual Pardon of the Legal Guilt of Believers Sins is twofold.

1. Formal, of all their Sins past, removing their Legal Guilt.

2. Virtual, of all their Sins to come, preventing their Legal Guilt.

Formal Pardon takes off Legal Guilt, where once it was.

Virtual Pardon keeps it off, where else it would be.

Formal Pardon takes away all the Actual Legal Guilt, contracted up­on [Page 7] the Person from all Sin, whether inherent in, or committed by him, before his Faith.

Virtual Pardon, all capacity from the Person upon his Faith, not in­deed of having in his Nature, or committing in his Actions, any more Sin (for then could there be no room for so much as Virtual Pardon), but of contracting any more such Legal Guilt from any Sin, whether inhe­rent in his Nature, or committed by him in his Actions, for time to come.

And in this very Point, lying the main stress of the Controversie, con­sider briefly (which will much help to clear it) that (not the Nature, not the Actions, but) the Person (according indeed both to his Nature and Actions) is the proper Subject of all Law-Obligation, whether of the Precept to Obedience, or Threat­ning to Punishment for Disobedience; and therefore must be the proper Sub­ject also of all Law-Disobligation, or Dissolution of Law-Obligation, whe­ther for one End, or another. Since then a Person, while out of Christ, [Page 8] is the unhappy Subject of the most severe and rigorous Obligation, as of the Precept of the Law to Obedience for his Justification, so of the Threat­ning of the Law to Condemnation, and all Legal Punishment for his Disobedience; Accordingly must a Person, when in Christ, be the hap­py Subject of the most gracious Dis­solution of the severe and rigorous Obligation, as of the same Precept of the Law to Obedience (not sim­ply, but) as to Justification; so also of the same Threatning of the Law (not indeed simply, but) as to Con­demnation, or any Legal Punish­ment for his Disobedience. And as from this dissolution of the Legal Obligation of the Threatning, is the Actual, Formal Pardon or dissoluti­on of the Legal Obligation of such a Persons Sins past (for Sin cannot be formally Remitted, before it be for­mally Committed) so from hence must (and cannot, but) be also the Actual Virtual Pardon, or Dissolution of the Legal Guilt or Obligation of such a Persons Sins to come.

[Page 9] Yet as the Precept in the hand of Christ still binds to Obedience upon Gospel-Grounds, and to Gospel-Ends and Purposes (though not for Justi­fication) so the Threatning in the hand of Christ, still binds (though not to Condemnation or any Legal Punishment, yet) upon Gospel-Grounds, and for Gospel-Ends and Purposes, to Gospel-Chastisements for Disobedience in Sins to come: Which Sins, when they come, as they derive a new Gospel Guilt (though no new Legal Guilt) upon the Person; so they need a new Go­spel-Pardon (though no new Legal-Pardon, nor indeed are capable of it) therefore.

Secondly, Gospel-Pardon of Gospel-Guilt, is the dissolution of Gospel-Obligation to Gospel-Chastisement for Gospel-Sin. For as there is Le­gal or Gospel-Obedience, according to Legal or Gospel-Precepts; so a­gainst such Precepts is there Legal or Gospel-Sin. The Nature of this Gospel-Pardon will the better appear, in the manifold Differences of it from [Page 10] Legal Pardon. Such as these that follow.

1. Gospel-Pardon is an Act of meer Mercy of God as a Father, only up­on the Intercession of Christ, im­proving therein his Merit with the Father, for dealing with his Mem­bers in this regard also as Children; Gospel-Guilt needing not for its Gospel-Pardon, any Legal Satisfa­ction.

Legal-Pardon is a Sentence of Ab­solution from God as a Judge, both from his Justice and Mercy, upon both the Merit and Satisfaction of Christ, improved upon his Interces­sion for condemned Prisoners of Law, but Elect Prisoners, to be so made his Members and his Fathers Chil­dren.

2. Gospel-Guilt is sometimes whol­ly pardoned, sometimes but in part, partly remitted, partly retained. Such was David's guilt of Adultery and Murder, and such its Pardon; partly remitted, the Lord put away his Sin (the Gospel-Guilt of his Sin) so that he dyed not in his own Per­son: [Page 11] And partly retained, so that he was Chastened for it, in the Death of his Adulterous Issue, 2 Sam. 12. as well as otherwise by his Son Abso­lom, there also Threatned.

Legal Guilt is alway either wholly Pardon'd, or wholly Unpardon'd; either all remitted, or not at all: That having place here, Nil solvitur nisi totum.

3. Gospel Guilt may be remitted, as contracted, successively and of­ten.

Legal Guilt, however contracted, is remitted all together, at once, and but once.

4. Gospel Guilt, when, and so far as Pardon'd, is alway Pardon'd for­mally and in it self; first by Gospel-Transgression redounding upon, and then by Gospel-Grace removed off from the Person.

Legal Guilt is Pardon'd, partly Formally, and in it self; as in all Sins foregoing Justification; partly Vir­tually, and in the Person; as in all Sins following Justification. In those, their Legal Guilt so removed from, as if it never had redounded upon [Page 12] the Person: In these their Legal Guilt so removed from the Person, as it never can redound upon it: The Person being now a priviledg'd Per­son in Jesus Christ, and no more Chargeable with Legal Guilt, than Christ himself.

For as Personal Vnion in Christ, everlastingly prevents the resulting of its proper personality out of his Humane Nature so united, which out of all other Natures not so united, immediately results; So Mystical V­nion with Christ everlastingly pre­vents the redounding of Legal Guilt upon the person so united, from his sinful Nature and Actions; which from all other such Natures and Acti­ons of persons not so united, imme­diately redounds.

5. Faith is the only Instrumental Means, or Causal Condition of Le­gal Pardon: Repentance (Godly Sorrow for Sin, and Amendment of of Life) the Consequents of this Pardon, as the effect of that Faith.

Repentance (Gospel-Sorrow for Sin, and Return to Child-like Obe­dience) as well as Faith, the Means [Page 13] of Gospel-Pardon, or Dissolution of the Obligation of Gospel-Threatning for Gospel-Sin, to Gospel-Punish­ment, i. e. Fatherly Chastisement: Or (in yet plainer English) of avoid­ing the Chastisements of God (which are often very severe upon his Chil­dren) the main work and Business of Gospel-Chastisement, being so done to the Hand of God; which is, by execution of Gospel-Chastisement upon them to reduce his Children into that Gospel-Aw and Order, wherein by the Gospel-Threatnings of them only, they would not be kept: And which Gospel-Chastise­ments He hath always in a readi­ness by Him, in that Variety, and with that Severity, that Legal Pu­nishments would be altogether as improper and useless to his mixt Ju­stice and Mercy as a Father, towards the compassing of his Gospel-Designs and Purposes upon his Children, as Gospel-Chastisements would be to his simple Justice as a Judge, towards the Attainment of his Legal Aimes and Ends upon his Enemies. Nor are those Gospel-Chastisements used [Page 14] by Him towards his Children, but when there is, nor further than there is need (1 Pet. 1. 6.) for the effect­ing of some such good, as in an or­dinary way of his Providence could not otherwise be brought about.

Some other Differences might be offer'd, but these being the Princi­pal, will afford a sufficiently large Prospect into both the Necessity and Nature of these two so different kinds of Pardon.

III. Touching Prayer for Pardon.

1 The Removal of the Fundamen­tal, Habitual Guilt of Sin, the de­sert of Punishment, is not to be pray­ed for by any, whether in, or out of Christ. Desert of Punishment being of the very Nature of Sin it self, (and not only by the Constitution of God thereabout) altogether inse­parable from Sin. Those in Christ are to pray to God to remove that Sin from them, whose Desert of Pu­nishment cannot be removed from it; and to spread their Sins before the Lord in the highest sense of the deep­est [Page 15] Demerit of all Legal Punishment; that so they may put the higher, both Accent upon the Free Grace of God, and Estimate upon the full Satisfaction of Christ, whereby their Persons are so fully freed from all Actual Obligation to any of that Le­gal Punishment, the whole and ut­most whereof their Sins so deeply Deserve.

The Removal of the Actual For­mal 2 Guilt, or Dissolution of its Actual Obligation to Legal Punish­ment, those out of Christ are to pray for, Acts 8. 22, 23. And that both Formal, of all their Sins past, and Virtual, of all their Sins to come: There being as well Promise upon their Faith, of never coming into Condemnation again, Joh. 5 24. as of being freed from Condemnation at present, Joh. 3. 18. And even such their Prayer, may prevail as Prayer, though not as their Prayer; as Gods Ordinance, though not as their Performance; though not as a Part of Duty in persons out of Christ, [Page 16] yet as a Means of Grace in the hand of Christ. Otherwise Simon Peter would never have given it in directi­on to Simon Magus, when in the Bond of Iniquity; a perfect Scriptural De­finition of the Guilt of Sin.

3 This Legal Pardon it self, whe­ther Formal of Sins past, or Virtual of Sins to come, Those in Christ are not to pray for, as that which is yet to be, or indeed now can be a-new granted to them, (There being no possibility of the Dissolution of an Obligation, where is none of the Obligation it self, so to be Dissolved) But they are to praise God through Christ for it; as that which is alrea­dy, upon their first believing (and thereby Being) in Christ, fully gran­ted to them, beyond all Need of Re­petition, because beyond all Possibi­lity of Intercision: Especially when it is not more their Duty in Prayer, to take to themselves the due Shame (as of the Remainders of the filth and power of Sin still in their Na­tures, so) of the Gospel-Guilt of Sin still on their Persons; then to give [Page 17] to God the due Glory of his Grace (as in the initial purging of the filth of Sin out of, and subduing the power of Sin, in their Natures, so) in the perfect Removal of the Legal Guilt of Sin from off their Persons; which seems to have been the Apostle's very frame and carriage, Rom. 7. 24, 25. and 8. 1. Gods continuance indeed (or non-Revocation) of such his gracious pardon (even till his pro­nouncing the Final Sentence of it at the General Judgment) together with their own continual further renewed Sense and Assurance of such its both Grant and Continuance, those in Christ are to pray for: There being Need of, Precept for, and Pro­mise to Prayer for these latter; none at all for those former, either For­mal, or Virtual Pardon to be Re­peated.

Gospel-Pardon of Sin, or Dissolu­tion 4 of their Gospel-Obligation for Gospel-Sin to Gospel-punishment, i. e. Fatherly Chastisement, Those in Christ are to pray for: (as of that Guilt or Penal Obligation, which can [Page 18] alone in that State be incumbent on them, and on them alone) This not Absolutely, but Conditionally: And that not only upon Condition of Faith (the only Condition of Legal Pardon) or only Faith and Repen­tance together (the joynt ordinary, but not only Condition of Gospel-pardon). But upon such Conditi­ons also, if and so far as, it may be consistent with Gods Glory, their own, and others good, so far forth (and no further) it may be pardon'd; i. e. That their Heavenly Father would no further Chasten them his Children for their Sins, then may be conducing to the afore-mentioned Ends: And so far sorth, as they have daily Need of their own to seek, the Precept of Christ for seeking, and the Promise of Christ, for receiving Gospel-Pardon; So also the Spirit of Christ so to seek, that they may re­ceive it; that is, not only with such Child like fear of Chastening, Threat­ned by an offended Father, but also with such godly Sense of, and Sor­row for their Offences themselves, and such Humble Gospel-Confidence [Page 19] (upon the Conditions specify'd) of promised Pardon from a Gracious, though Offended Father, as those out of Christ, do not, cannot seek Legal-Pardon withal: Even as we see Pardon, not with less Earnestness, but with much other manner of Affections and Assurance, begg'd by a Child from a Father, than by a Pri­soner from a Judge.

IV. Arguments proving Directly the Main, and by just Consequence the Whole of all this. Drawn from

The Legal Guilt of Believers Sins to come, 1. Imputati­on of Be­lievers Sins to Christ be­fore eom­mitted by them. is in the same Capacity of being Dis-imputed, and pardoned to them, as it was of being Imputed to and discharged by Christ. All the Legal Guilt of all the Sins to come of all Believers after Christ, was Legally Imputed to, and discharged by Christ. Ergo &c. And if the Legal Guilt of both Sins and Per­sons, not yet in being, might be Legally Imputed to, and discharg'd by Christ; much more may the Le­gal [Page 20] Guilt of Sins not yet in being, be Legally Remitted to Persons al­ready Being, and being Believers, Virtually, and in such Persons, though not Formally, and in such Sins them­selves.

The Legal Guilt of their Sins may (at least) as well be Virtually dis­imputed to Believers, 2. Imputati­on of Christs Satisfac­tion, to Be­lievers before wrought by Him. before com­mitted by them, as the Satisfaction of Christ, Formally Imputed to Be­lievers, before wrought by Him. This, before wrought by Him, was Formally Imputed to all Believers before Christ. Ergo, &c. Reason of the Major: For if the Acts of Moral Causes may be Morally put forth before such Causes are them­selves Actually in Being (as it was in that Case of Christs Satisfaction not then wrought, when putting forth its Moral Act, in its Formal Imputation to the Formal Pardon of the Legal-Guilt of Sins past, to Believers before Christ) much more may such Moral Impediments be laid in before such Causes are in Be­ing, as shall effectually hinder the [Page 21] putting forth of such their Acts, when such Causes come Actually to be (as it is in this Case of Christs Satisfaction now wrought, Formally Imputed to the Virtual Pardon of Believers Sins to come, effectually hindering the putting forth of their Moral Act, the deriving of any Legal Guilt upon such Persons, when such Sins are come) Or with any who conceive the Satisfaction of Christ, not yet Formally wrought by Him, could not be Formally, but only Virtually imputed to Belie­vers, before Christ Incarnate, Let the Argument run thus.

That which, but Virtually Im­puted, was efficacious to the Formal Pardon of the Legal Guilt of their Sins past, who believed in Christ yet to come, cannot, being Formally Imputed, be inefficacious to the Virtual Pardon of the Legal Guilt of their Sins to come, who believe in Christ already come. But the Satisfaction of Christ, &c. Ergo, &c. And then let the Reason in the Form of Argument before used, be accordingly applyed.

[Page 22] The Sins of Believers are so Re­mitted to them, Arg. 3. Imputati­on of Christs Satisfa­ction as wrought for Belie­vers. as the Satisfaction of Christ for their Sins was Wrought by Him and Imputed to them. That was not Wrought by Him, and Imputed to them, some parts of it for some, and other parts for other their Sins; But all of it toge­ther for all their Sins. Ergo, &c. For though the Sufferings of Christ were many, his Satisfaction was but One, made up of all his Sufferings: And as his Sufferings, however seve­rally and successively undergone by Him, are yet all together in their Legal Satisfaction, at once Imputed to Believers; So their Sins, how­ever (in the Acts of them) seve­rally and successively committed by them, are yet (through that Satis­faction of those Sufferings so Imput­ed) all together in their Legal Guilt, at once Remitted to Belie­vers.

[Page 23] If a Believers Sins past before his Justification needed not many parti­cular Legal Pardons, Arg. 4. Proportion twixt Sin forego­ing and follow­ing Justi­fication, as to any need of many par­ticular Legal Pardons. but were in his Justification all compriz'd in one General Act of Formal Pardon; nei­ther do his Sins to come after his Justification, need many particular Legal Pardons; but are in his Justi­fication (as to their Legal Guilt) all as well compriz'd in one General Act of Virtual Pardon. But, &c. Ergo, &c. Nay to speak more ac­curately, Formal and Virtual Pardon, are not indeed two different Legal Pardons, but only two Different Re­spects of one and the same General Legal Pardon, which as it respects Sins foregoing, is Formal; As Sins following Justification, Virtual Par­don.

Where can be no new Applicati­on of Christ's Legal Satisfaction, Arg. 5. Impossibi­lity of Christ's Legal Sa­tisfaction being often applyed. there can be no new Pardon of Legal Guilt. To the Persons of Believers can be no new Application (though there may to their Consciences) of Christs Legal Satisfaction. Ergo (though there may to their Consci­ences) [Page 24] there can be to their Persons no new Pardon of Legal Guilt. Proof of the Minor. Where by the first Act of Faith, the whole Satisfaction of Christ was wholly Apply'd, and never after, either in whole or in part, again disapply'd, there can be no new Application of it. But, &c. Ergo, &c.

In whose Natures, Sin can never any more recover its Reigning Power, Arg. 5. Proporti­on be­tween the Guilt and Power of Sin. upon their Persons, it can never any more derive its Legal Guilt. In the Natures of Believers, Sin can never any more Recover its Reigning Po­wer. Ergo, &c. The Minor is clear from the Apostles Assertion, Rom. 6. 14. Sin shall not have do­minion over you. The Major also clear from the Reason of that his Assertion there rendred, For you are not under the Law, i. e. the Rigo­rous unallay'd Threatening of the Law, Ergo, not under Legal Guilt: But under Grace, i. e. Gospel-Grace allaying the Legal into a Gospel-Threatning; Ergo, under only Go­spel-Guilt of Sin. And this, if need­ful, [Page 25] may be thus further clear'd. The Unsubdu'd Power of Sin in Unbe­lievers, is a Legal Punishment: Er­go, the Guilt binding over to it, Le­gal Guilt. The Subdued Power of Sin in Believers, only a Gospel-Cha­stisement. Ergo, the Guilt binding over to it only Gospel-Guilt. (Both these Enthymems proceed upon the Reason of the 14th. Argument). And yet further thus; As the Sub­dued Power of Sin in Believers, con­sidered under the Notion of Malum Paenae, is only a Gospel-Chastisement, to which therefore only Gospel-Guilt obligeth; So consider'd under the Notion of Malum Culpae, it is only Gospel-Sin, Deriving therefore only Gospel-Guilt, binding over only to Gospel-Punishment.

So far as Believers are freed from Law-Curse for their Sins, Arg. 7. Believers Exempti­on from the Curse of the Law. so far are they freed from Law-Guilt of their Sins. They are wholly freed from all Law-Curse for all their Sins, even Sins to come, as well as present and past Sins, Gal. 3. 13. Ergo, &c. Reason of the Major: Because the [Page 26] Commination forming Obligation to Punishment (as the Command to Obedience), a Soul cannot be far­ther under the Obligation of its Com­mination, than under the Commi­nation it self.

Those who cannot be Condemned with a Sentence of Law-Condemna­tion for their Sins to come, cannot be guilty with Law-Guilt of their Sins to come. Arg. 8. Believers Freedom from the Sentence of the Law ac­cording to the Curse. Believers, Joh. 5. 24. cannot be Condemned, &c. Com­pare Psal. 32. 2. with Rom. 4. 8. both Translations and Originals with Rom. 8. 1. and Joh. 5. 24. Ergo, &c. Reason of the Major. Because Law-Threatning, according to which Sin derives Law-Guilt, or Obligati­to Law-Punishment upon any Per­sons, is the Rule of Gods Judgment or Sentence, which accordingly he always exactly passeth and pronounc­eth touching such Persons: He will by no means clear the Guilty, Exod. 34. 7. Numb. 14. 18. Nah. 1. 3. com­pared with the immediately before cited Texts.

[Page 27] The Principal can no longer be under any thing of that Law-Obli­gation, Arg. 9. Law Re­lation be­twixt Principal & Surety which was fully satisfied by the Surety, and that Satisfaction fully apply'd to the Principal. And so 'tis between Christ and Believer in this Point: Ergo, &c. Reason of the Major. Because Principal and Sure­ty (however Physically or Meta­physically Distinct) are Legally (or in Law-Construction) but one and the same Person.

The Curse of the Law can have no more to do with Believers in Point of Condemnation, than the Command of the Law in Point of Justification. Arg. 10. Proporti­on betwixt the Com­mination and Com­mand of the Law, incumbent upon Be­lievers. The Command of the Law can have nothing at all any more to do with Believers in point of Justification; Ergo, &c. Or thus. The Threatnings in the hand of Christ is temper'd and allay'd with as much of Gospel-Indulgence to Be­lievers as the Precept: The Precept in the hand of Christ bindeth not to Obedience for Justification in any their Duties to come. Ergo, Neither [Page 28] the Threatning to Condemnation, or any Legal Punishment, for Dis­obedience in any their Sins to come.

The perfect Satisfaction of Christ Imputed to Believers, Arg. 11. Proportion betwixt Satisfa­ction and Merit of Christ imputed to Believers is no more consistent with any their future Ob­ligation to Death and Hell for their Sins to come, than the perfect Merit of Christ imputed to Believers is con­sistent with any their future forfei­ture of Heaven and Glory, by their Sins to come. But &c, Ergo, &c.

The Satisfaction of Christ impu­ted to Believers is of as much force to prevent the Legal Guilt of their Sins to come, Arg. 12. Proportio­nable Po­wer of Christ's Satisfa­ction im­puted a­gainst fu­ture and past Sins. as to Remove the Le­gal Guilt of their Sins past. But &c. Ergo, &c. And if it do not keep off such Guilt of their Sins to come, from Redounding, how doth it keep off such Guilt of their Sins past, from Recurring upon their Per­sons!

[Page 29] Law-Guilt can no more Redound upon the Persons of Believers from any the Acts of Sin proceeding from them, Arg. 13. Proportion 'twixt Habits & Acts of Sin in Deriving Guilt. than from all the Habits of Sin Residing in them, and even Ori­ginal Sin it self more deeply rooted in corrupt Nature then the Habits. But &c. Ergo &c. Nay the Tran­sient Acts of Sin proceeding from Believers, have much less Funda­mental, Habitual Guilt or Demerit in them, than the Indwelling Ha­bits, or Original Sin, they proceed from: And therefore are much less able to Derive any Actual Legal Guilt upon their Believing Persons. And this was one main ground of Comfort the Apostle bore up his be­lieving Soul upon, under the trouble of all the Habits of Sin in his Nature, Rom. 7. 24. that they derived no Legal Guilt upon his Person, Rom. 8. 1.

Such as is the Punishment of a Believers Sin, Arg. 14. Proportion betwixt Guilt and Punish­ment of Sin. before Formally Par­doned, such is the Guilt of his Sin when committed. That is not; Ergo, this cannot be Legal, but only [Page 30] Evangelical. Reason. Because, Guilt being a Penal Obligation, and Penal Obligation a Relation of the Person to the Punishment, This Relation must be such as its Term, the Pu­nishment related to.

A Person cannot be under two cross and contrary Sentences of God together. Arg. 15. Impossibi­lity of be­ing under two con­trary Sen­tences of God, toge­ther. A Sentence of Justifica­tion adjudging him to Heaven and Glory upon the Righteousness of Christ; And a Sentence of Condem­nation adjudging him to Death and Hell for his own Sins. But so should a Believer be, could any Legal Guilt Redound upon his Person from his Sins. The Reason of the Major in the 8th. Argument, having its full force here also.

An Elect Persons Sins to come, Arg. 16. Different State of Pardon of Elect per­sons Sins to come, before and after Faith. are in a better posture and state of Pardon to him in his own Person upon his Believing, than they were in the Person of Christ only, before his Believing. They, before his Believing, were Fundamentally par­doned; Ergo, upon his believing [Page 31] pardon'd Actually. Actually-Virtu­ally, though not Formally. Other­wise something might be Legally laid to the Charge of God's Elect, contrary to that of the Apostle, Rom. 8. 33. Where the Word Elect is to be understood consequenter (as they call it) of Elect Believing Ones.

The main strength of all (that any otherwise minded may have where-against mainly to oppose themselves) lyeth here.

All Obligation to Punishment, is from the Threatning (as all to Obe­dience from the Precept) a Threat­ning, whose own power of Penal, Legal Obligation is Dissolved, can no more give power of Penal Legal Obligation to Sins to come, then it can to Sins past. So that in Conclusion, These cannot be Formally pardoned, where those are not pardoned Vir­tually.