SECT. 27. John 14 forestalled. Way, truth, etc. are exclusive.
Again, when Christ is called the way, the truth, and the life; and that is done by way of comparison — so that whatever is not Christ, is not the way, but out of the way; nor truth, but a lie; nor life, but death — Freewill, being neither Christ, nor in Christ, must have its dwelling place in error, falsehood, and death. Where then is this middle and neutral substance to be found — this averred substance of Freewill? And from where is it to be proved? Not being Christ (that is, the way, the truth, and the life), how does it not necessarily become error, falsehood, and death? For, if what is said about Christ and his grace were not all said by way of comparison, in opposition to their contraries, then what would all the discourses of the Apostles, and all of Scripture, amount to? For example, that outside of Christ there is none but the devil; outside of grace there is nothing but wrath; outside of light there is nothing but darkness; outside of the way, there is nothing but error; outside of the truth, there is nothing but falsehood; outside of life, there is nothing but death. 742
All of this would surely be said in vain, since it would not force the conclusion that Christ is necessary to us (which is their great object, however). For some middle substance might be discovered which, of itself, is neither evil nor good. It belongs neither to Christ nor to Satan; it is neither true nor false, neither alive nor dead — yes, perhaps it is neither anything nor nothing — yet it is to be called the noblest and most excellent endowment of all that is found in the whole human race.
Choose whichever you will, therefore. If you grant that the Scriptures speak by way of comparison, you can ascribe nothing to Freewill which is not contrary to what is in Christ; you must say of it, that error, death, Satan, and all evil reigns in it. If you do not grant that they speak by way of comparison, in that case you enervate the Scriptures to such a degree, that they effect nothing, and do not prove that Christ is necessary. Thus, in establishing Freewill, you make Christ void, and tread all Scripture underfoot. Again, while you pretend in words to be confessing Christ, you really and with your heart deny him. For, if Freewill is not all error and damnation, but sees and wills things that are honest and good, and also things which pertain to salvation, then she is whole, and has no need of Christ for her doctor; nor has Christ redeemed that part of our nature. For what need is there of light and life, where there is light and life?
Now, if this is not redeemed by Christ, then the best ingredient in the composition of man is not redeemed either; rather, it is good and sound of itself. In this case, God is also unjust in condemning any man, because he condemns that which is best in man, and which is sound; in other words, He condemns the innocent.
For there is no man who does not have Freewill. And though a bad man abuses his Freewill, still we are taught that the power itself is not extinguished in him — so as neither to strive for good, nor to be able to strive for it. Now, if it is such, then without doubt it is holy, just, and good. And therefore, it should not be condemned, but be separated from the man who is to be condemned. But this cannot be; and if it could be, then in that case the man, no longer having Freewill, would no longer be a man. He would neither merit evil nor good, nor be damned or saved, but must be an absolute brute, and no longer an immortal being. It remains, therefore, that God is unjust who condemns that holy, just, and good power which has no need of Christ, in and with a bad man. 743
SECT. 28. John 3.18, 36.
But let us go on with John. “He who believes on him,” he says, “is not judged. He who does not believe, has been judged already, 744 because he does not believe in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” Joh 3.18
Tell me whether Freewill is in the number of the believers, or not? If she is, then again, she has no need of grace, seeing that she believes in Christ of herself. This Christ, however, she neither knows, nor has any conception of. If she is not a believer, she has been judged already: and what is this, if not that she has been condemned before God? Now, God condemns nothing except what is wicked. She is wicked, therefore: and what pious act can an impious thing attempt? Nor can Freewill be excepted here, I suppose, since he speaks of the whole man, which he says is condemned. Besides, unbelief is not a gross affection, but that highest sort of affection which sits and reigns in the citadel of the will and understanding — just as faith does, its contrary. Now, to be unbelieving is to deny God, and to make him a liar. (1Joh 1.10) If we do not believe, we make God a liar. 745 Now, how can that power which is contrary to God, and which makes Him a liar, strive after good? If this power were not unbelieving and ungodly, he would not have said about the whole man, “he has been judged already.” He would have spoken thus: ‘the man has been judged already with respect to his gross affections; but with respect to his best and most excellent affection, he is not judged, because it strives after faith, or rather, it is even now believing.’
Thus, as often as the Scripture says, “Every man is a liar,” we will say upon the authority of Freewill, ‘On the contrary, the Scripture lies, because man is not a liar in his best part, that is, in his understanding and will, but only in his flesh, blood, and marrow; so that all from which man takes his name — that is, understanding and will — is sound and holy.’
So it would be, in that saying of the Baptist’s, “He that believes on the Son, has everlasting life: but he that does not believe the Son, shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” We must understand ‘upon him’ to mean that the wrath of God remains ‘upon his gross affections;’ but grace and eternal life abide upon that eminent power of Free will — truly, upon his understanding and will. It appears from this example, that to maintain Freewill, you turn and twist by a synecdoche, 746 what is said in the Scriptures against ungodly men, so as to confine it to the brutish part of man; hereby you keep the rational and truly human part of him safe and sound. In this case, I must render my thanks to the assertors of Freewill, since I will not feel the least concern for my sin. I will be confident that my understanding and will — that is, my Freewill — cannot be condemned (as it is never extinguished), but always remains sound, just, and holy. But if my understanding and will are to be happy, I will rejoice that my filthy and brutish flesh is separated and condemned — this is how far am I from wishing that Christ be its redeemer. Thus you see where the dogma of Freewill carries us: even to denying all divine and human, temporal and eternal realities, and to deluding itself with so many monstrous fictions!
So again, the Baptist says, “a man cannot receive anything unless it has been given to him from heaven.” Joh 3.27
Cease, Diatribe, to display your great fluency here, by enumerating all the things which we receive from heaven! We are not arguing about nature, but about grace. We are not inquiring what sort of persons we are on earth, but in heaven and before God.
We know that man is constituted lord of the things beneath him — things over which he has power and Freewill so that they may obey him, and may do what he wills and thinks. But this is our question: whether he has Freewill towards God, so that God obeys and does what man wills; or instead, whether God has Freewill over man, so that man wills and does what God wills, and can do nothing except what God has willed and done. Here the Baptist says that he can receive nothing, unless it is given to him from heaven: so that Freewill is nothing. 747
So again, “He that is of the earth is earthly, and speaks of the earth; he that comes from heaven is above all.” Joh 3.31
Here again, he makes all earthly who are not of Christ (and says that they mind and speak earthly things); he leaves none between the two. But Freewill, surely, is not ‘he that comes from heaven.’ So that Freewill must be of the earth, and must mind and speak the things of the earth.
Now, if there were any power in any man, which at any time, in any place, in any work, did not mind earthly things, then the Baptist should have excepted this man, and not said generally, concerning all those who are
