Wesley Corpus

You think this appears from four texts: (1) From that, ‘Thou gavest them to Me.’ Nay; when any believe, ‘the Father gives them to Christ.’ But this proves no such previous contract. (2) ‘God hath laid upon Him the iniquities of us all.’ Neither does this prove any such thing. (3) That expression, ‘The counsel of peace shall be between them,’ does not necessarily imply any more than that both the Father and the Son would concur in the redemption of man. (4) ‘According to the counsel of His will’ -that is, in the way or method He had chosen. Therefore neither any of these texts, nor all of them, prove what they were brought to prove. They do by no means prove that there ever was any such covenant made between the Father and the Son. ‘The conditions of the covenant are recorded: “Lo, I come to do Thy will”’ (page 301). Nay; here is no mention of any covenant, nor anything from which it can be inferred. ‘The recompense stipulated in this glorious treaty.’ But I see not one word of the treaty itself; nor can I possibly allow the existence of it without far other proof than this. ‘Another copy of this grand treaty is recorded, Isa. xlix., from the 1st to the 6th verse’ (ibid.). I have read them, but cannot find a word about it in all those verses. They contain neither more nor less than a prediction of the salvation of the Gentiles. ‘By the covenant of works man was bound to obey in his own person’ (page 302). And so he is under the covenant of grace; though not in order to his justification. ‘The obedience of our Surety is accepted instead of our own.’ This is neither a safe nor a scriptural way of speaking. I would simply say, ‘We are accepted through the Beloved. We have redemption through His blood.’