This is the marrow of what has been called Neonomianism - William Rushton

The last error I shall charge upon Mr. Fuller’s principles is one which is not openly avowed in his writings, but which follows as a deduction from his general sentiments: namely, that not the obedience of Christ, but the act of believing, is imputed to us for righteousness. This is, in short, neither more nor less than a revival of the Neonomian error, which error consists principally in the following doctrine; viz., "That Christ, having satisfied for the breach of the old law of works, hath procured and given a new law, a remedial law, which is the gospel, containing precepts, promises and threatening, and which saith, DO AND LIVE, in some milder sense than the first covenant. That faith in Christ is the principal part of that obedience which is required by the new law, and this is accepted for righteousness, instead of that perfect unceasing obedience, which the law of ten commands requires." [See the preface to Beart’s Eternal Law, &c.] This is the marrow of what has been called Neonomianism; which doctrine, as to substance, is taught in the writings of Mr. Baxter, of the Arminians, and of the most learned of the Roman Catholics.

Every Sermon that makes the Gospel a Law - Isaac Chauncy

Every Sermon that makes the Gospel a Law; that press duty under a law-sanction, should not only be a matter of debate; but earnestly contended against; for the performance of duty as terms enforced by a law-sanction is a covenant of works. So that such men are preachers of a law, it’s no matter what law. Works performed under a law-sanction are legal works, and do make the covenant enjoining them a covenant of works.

If we fetch assurances from our duties, we boast - Samuel Crisp

"I will touch on two of his reasons that we must fetch assurance from

our own duties.

1. “He that believes shall be saved, and believing is our act,

therefore, etc.” I must answer, though God says, “Believe, and thou

shalt be saved;” he does not say, believe, and thence raise your

assurance from your graces and duties: he excludes boasting, and

saith, “it is by faith, not of works, lest any boast;” but if we fetch

assurances from our duties, we boast.

2. His second reason is in folio 77, “We are without the law of works

or of Moses, but Jesus Christ hath made us a law of grace; this hath

precepts, promises, and threats; he that performs the condition is

righteous in the sense of this law.” (Here is virtually a clear

negation of Christ's righteousness imputed to us to make us

righteous;) it is our performance of the condition, that is, our

repentance and sincere obedience (as folio 54,) makes us righteous in

the sense of this law; or he that performs it, is righteous in the

sense of this law; therefore we must raise our assurance on this. Here

is much fallacy in the argument; he does not say plainly, “our

performance makes us righteous,” folio 75, but he saith it in effect,

folio 54, “Repentance and sincere obedience are parts of the condition

of the new covenant.” So that we are delivered by grace from one

covenant of works, from the duty of being legally righteous, to

another covenant of works of repentance and sincere obedience, which

acts are our evangelical righteousness, (as folio 78.) So that we are

clearly brought from Moses's yoke of bondage, to Antichrist's yoke of

a new-fangled evangelical righteousness of sincere obedience to

justify us. I always thought our Lord Jesus Christ was made of God to

us righteousness, and that was our evangelical righteousness, however

termed Antinomian doctrine; but now we have a new law of threats, and

precepts, and promises, and he that performs the condition, is

righteous in the sense of this law."

Sir, the new Law is here - [Exposing the New Law of Neonomianism] - John Brine

"The Author [the Baxterian] endeavours to clear himself of the Charge of holding the Opinion of a New Law. The Method he takes to do it, is this: We maintain , says he, the Perfection and perpetual Obligation of the moral Law of God , and plead for no new Law in the Room of that , so as to annul it . We don’t make Repentance and Faith a Covenant of Works, nor Salvation to depend only on these as Man’s Duties . But the Gospel we call a new Dispensation, built upon God’s Act of Grace in Christ. And as the Fall occasioned a new Relation between God and Man, new Duties necessarily arise from hence. The moral Law is not only kept up in its Perfection, but it is put into the Hands of Christ, as the appointed Lord and King in the Church; and it is also attemper’d to the State and Condition of Sinners and Gospel Grace. The Place which Repentance and Faith hold in the new Covenant, is all of Grace; and there Duties are to be performed by the Help and Strength of God’s Grace, and must be accepted thro’ Christ. Where then is the Charge of a new Law?

Upon which I thus remark: It seems to be allowed, that a new Law is introduced, yet not so as to annul the old Law; that, notwithstanding retains its Power and Force, only Men are also under another Law, which if they keep, they shall not suffer that Punishment the old Law threatens; but in Case they keep not this new Law, they are delivered over to the Curse of the old Law. Again, if Repentance and Faith are proper Conditions of Salvation, they are made a Covenant of Works; all the Difference is, the old Law required perfect Works as Conditions of Happiness, here imperfect Works serve the Purpose.

Farther, it is plainly allowed, that Salvation depends on Faith and Repentance, (tho’ not only) as Man’s Duties: And therefore Men are in Part causes of their Salvation. I add, I suppose the Act of God’s Grace mentioned, is dispensing with the rigorous Demand of Perfection in the moral Law, as a Condition of Life, upon which the Gospel Dispensation is laid to be built, which lowers the Condition to imperfect Obedience. Moreover, if Repentance is one of those Duties, which necessarily arise from the new Relation, occasioned by the Fall, between God and Man, then it would have been the Duty of Men, in Case no Provision had been made for their Recovery, which is what the Author has more than once seemed to disallow.

I cannot understand what new Relation between God and Man takes Place upon the Fall. Before the Fall, God was Creator, a Lawgiver and Judge to Man: So he was upon the Fall; Man before it, was his Creature, the Subject of his Rule and Government, and so he is after it; but now a Creature chargeable with Guilt, and obnoxious to Death, these are new Circumstances to the unhappy Creature Man; but in no Sense, as I can at present apprehend, may they be denominated a new Relation to God.

I subjoin, it is granted, that the moral Law is put into the Hands of Christ, and he uses that Law, either as a Saviour, or as a Judge merely; in the former Sense, he acquits his People upon the Foundation of his Obedience and Sufferings, and flees them from it as a Covenant of Works: In the latter Sense, he retains Men under the Curse and Condemnation of it now, and will hereafter try, judge and condemn them to endless Misery, according to that Law. I deny, that the old Law is attempered to the State, and Condition of Sinners and Gospel Grace, it commands the same Holiness it ever did, and threatens the same Punishment in Case of Sin, or Defect in Obedience; otherwise its Perfection and perpetual Obligation cease, which this Writer a few Lines above professes to maintain perfectly inconsistent with what is here said, unless I mistake.

To say that Repentance and Faith are Conditions of Life, as an Effect of divine Grace, will not acquit the Opinion, of being contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostle, who constantly denies, that Salvation is of a Law, or of Works. And tho’ these Duties are said to be performed by the Help and Strength of God’s Grace, and that they are accepted thro Christ; yet it is easy to see, that the promised Benefit of Life, becomes due upon the Foot of Right, on the Performance of those Duties, and therefore, the Reward is not of Grace, but of Debt; and that these Duties are to be considered, as the Matter of our Justification before God for Christ’s Sake.

To the Author’s Enquiry therefore, I must take leave to say, Sir, the new Law is here, and that he will never be able to clear himself of so heavy but just a Charge. All the Art he has used, in the Choice of ambiguous Phrases, could not cover his Design, it was a vain Thing in him to expect it; for if Men deliver Principles, which necessarily resolve themselves into the Opinion of a new Law, it can’t reasonably be thought, That that Opinion should long remain out of View.

But what follows is exceeding strange, he tells the Calvinist it would not be difficult to make Reprisals. For you must grant, says he, that the Law is no longer in Force as a Covenant of Works, for the Justification of Sinners: This infers so far an Alteration from the original Law; and therefore one might say you make a new Law. The Answer is, that it is not merely as a Law, it requires Obedience of Men as a Condition of Life, but as it is a Covenant. Their Freedom from it, as requiring Obedience to such an End, infers no Change in it as a Law, for it is not essential to it as a Law, to command Obedience to such an End; but it is essential to it as a Law to require Obedience, and if it now demands of Men imperfect Obedience, it is altered in what is essential to It as a Law, and therefore, is not the same Law it was. Farther, it is still in force, as a Covenant requiring perfect Righteousness in Order to Acceptance with God: Believers have such a perfect Righteousness in Christ, and therefore, they stand perfectly justified in the Sight of God, according to this Law, fulfilled for them, by Christ their great Surety and Saviour." -John Brine

A new law based on easier terms (or duties) - Gery Schmidt

"...the Mosaic Law demonstrates that duty has no place in the matter of salvation. The apostle Paul speaks of the Law as a tutor (Gal. 3:24), and with respect to our theme, the Law instructs us on two critical points. First, it illustrates the total depravity of man. When we take a panoramic view of the Old Testament history of Israel, the Sinaitic covenant witnesses time and time again the sinfulness of the Israelites. From the time they came up out of Egypt, to the time of their exile, and upon their return from captivity, the depravity of the Israelites is always made manifest in the light of the Law. But this very manifestation of the Israelites' depravity was in fact one reason why God gave the Law unto Israel. In Romans 5:20 Paul writes that "the Law came in that the transgression might increase." Now the Law which God gave to Moses was both perfect and holy, and it represented a duty-ridden system. Well what was the outcome when this duty-ridden system was given unto Israel? It only exposed their depravity in that not one soul was able to keep the Law perfectly. The Law made manifest man's natural enmity toward God, and consequently, the transgressions of the Israelites only increased, precisely as God had intended. And the grand lesson here is that the Law, in exposing man's depravity, points him away from himself, and away from the performance of duties.


Secondly, the Law illustrates the absolute necessity of grace in salvation. In Gal 3:24 Paul writes that "the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith." We just saw how the Law exposes man's depravity, and that it points sinners away from both themselves and the performance of duties. The apostle Paul notes that this very Law directs sinners unto Jesus Christ. It is Christ alone, the God-man, who was able to both keep the Law and offer himself up as a propitiatory sacrifice in the stead of his elect. In demonstrating both man's depravity and inability to save himself, the Law shows forth the absolute necessity of God's grace, and thus points to Christ who alone is the all-sufficient Saviour of his people. The Law does not point sinners away from one set of duties only to direct them to another set of duties.


Neonomianism, however, actually propounds just such a view. This heresy posits that the gospel is a new law based on easier terms (or duties). But such a view misunderstands the purpose of the law, and destroys the very truth that salvation is all of grace. For in replacing one set of duties with another set of duties (the duties of repenting, believing, etc.), one still ends up with salvation by works, the very thing the Mosaic Law intended to direct sinners away from. Further, since the Law only exposes man's depravity, so that transgressions only increase, and points him unto Christ, how can the introduction of a new law, based on supposedly easier terms, possibly improve the situation for the unregenerate? The Law however, points sinners to Christ, and not to duties of any sort. And thus it reveals that duty has no place in the matter of salvation." -Gery Schmidt

Penalty on those for whom Christ died? - John Brine

He [a Baxterian] makes the Calvinist object to his opinion, that supposing the death of Christ to be of universal extent, implies he died in vain. To which he answers thus: as often as I meet with this objection, I cannot find any just reason or foundation to support it. There certainly is a twofold design and intention in the redemption wrought out for sinners. One is, that the patience and forbearance, the rich goodness, mercy and grace of God, might be manifested and glorified in his dealing with sinners. And the ether is, that his righteous government, his power, his holiness and justice might be also glorified. Now if through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, the patience and forbearance of God, and the riches of his mercy and grace are displayed and glorified, in his present dealings with sinners, which is the case on our side of the question. And if his holiness, justice and power are glorified to the full, in the condemnation and destruction of the impenitent and ungodly hereafter; this is not in vain, but exactly of a piece with God’s great and complicated designs in providence and redemption. Where grace is rejected and despised, punishing justice will be glorified. To which I reply, Sir, thus.

1. This seems to suppose, it was a thing indifferent to God, whether his mercy is glorified in the salvation of sinners, or whether his justice is glorified in their destruction, upon the foundation of the redemption of Christ; that his end is as fully answered in the gift of his Son for sinners in their damnation, as it is in their salvation; whereas it was his intention that his grace and mercy might be glorified in their salvation, and therefore, if they are not saved he is disappointed of his end in this extraordinary transaction, and his Son suffered death in vain, or the end intended, in his death is unaccomplished. That this was the end designed is evident; for God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life. The reader may see this more largely insisted on, in the answer to the author of Ruin and Recovery.

2. The justice and holiness of God are fully vindicated, and gloriously displayed, in the remission of sin, and in the eternal salvation of sinners, upon the foundation of Christ’s death, (Rom. 3:25,26); and therefore, the infliction of penalty on those for whom Christ died, cannot be to the glory of his justice.

3. It would be contrary to justice; for Christ having made satisfaction for the sins of those, for whom he suffered, it cannot consist with justice to punish them for their offences.

4. How are the riches of divine grace now glorified in God’s dealings with the heathen, whom he suffers to live in gross darkness and in the shadow of death? How can his justice be hereafter glorified in punishing of them for impenitence, who never had an opportunity of hearing of Christ, and by consequence, could not believe in him nor reject him.

A Prayer against baxterianism - John brine

"May the Lord, of his infinite Mercy grant, that his People may discern, into what Tenets this Person and some others are about to lead them, before Arminianism takes Root, in Societies, where it has long had no Place; but been rejected, as a Scheme of Doctrines not calculated to promote the Honour of God, the Glory of a Redeemer, nor the Comfort of the Saints." -John Brine

Exposing the baxterianism pretenders - John Brine

[Brine is exposing a Baxterian who pretends to agree with the Calvinist] "I am, Sir, surprized at what follows in the Author, which is this, he pretends that he agrees in the Doctrines of God’s free Grace with those  Calvinists , who think that evangelical Repentance and special Faith are the Duties of unregenerate Men, and apprehend that the Obligation to those Duties arises from the moral Law; whereas there is nothing more false.

They suppose that God has chosen a certain Number of Men to everlasting Life; that for there Christ died in order to save them, and for no others, with that view, that Grace in order to Life and Happiness is given to the Elect alone. He supposes, that God conditionally decreed the Happiness of all, and that the Death of Christ is of unlimited Extent, that Grace is given to the Non-elect in order to Happiness, and that they may obtain Life, through a proper Improvement of this common Grace. Light and Darkness therefore, are not more contrary, than his Sentiments and those of the  Calvinists , in many Respects, notwithstanding this pretended Agreement." - John Brine