Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n ability_n act_v action_n 17 3 5.8934 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A29752 The life of justification opened, or, A treatise grounded upon Gal. 2, II wherein the orthodox doctrine of justification by faith, & imputation of Christ's righteousness is clearly expounded, solidly confirmed, & learnedly vindicated from the various objections of its adversaries, whereunto are subjoined some arguments against universal redemption / by that faithful and learned servant of Jesus Christ Mr. John Broun ... Brown, John, 1610?-1679. 1695 (1695) Wing B5031; ESTC R36384 652,467 570

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

is conceived to have when justified upon the account of which he is justified he should not only have occasion but even cause of boasting before men notwithstanding of the disproportion betwixt faith the weight of glory for it might then be said that he had made himself to differ that he had laid down out of his own purpose the whole price that was required and so had according to the termes of the Compact made a purchase of glory to himself as the man with the pin in his sleeve if the Law Covenant had so stood that all that gave the Prince a Pin out of his sleeve shall receive such such great things he only a few moe were so good merchants as to give the Pin when others did not might well have boasted said he had not gotten those great things for nothing for he laid down the full price condescended upon by Law Covenant and had ground of boasting at least before men though not before the Prince who graciously condescended to reward so richly such a mean gift 3 This answere will say that there had been no ground of boasting even by the old Covenant of works though man had keeped the Law perfectly for even then it might have been said that the weight of glory was not given for the really worth excellency of perfect Obedience Perfect Obedience Holiness having its sufficient reward in its own besome for it is a reward to it self But he saith If men had fulfilled the Law bin justified that way there had been some pretence of boasting or glorying in themselves Ans. And why not also if faith be now accounted the fulfilling of the Law and be now imputed to us as all our Righteousness Let us see if the reasons which he bringeth for the former will not also evince this His first is this Because such a Righteonsness had held some proportion at least that should have been given to it Rom. 4. vers 4. God had given them no more than what they had at least in some sort deserved Ans. But who can tell us what that proportion or that sort would have been And may not also the Righteousness of Faith which is here supposed to be of our selves and not the meer gift of God be said to hold some proportion at least in some fort Yea may it not in this respect be said to hold a greater proportion viz. that the exerting of the act of Faith now would argue more strength of free will to that which is good that Perfect Obedience in Adam for though we should suppose that man now had as full a power to beleeve if he would as Adam had to obey yet it cannot be denied but there is much more opposition now even within to that which is good than there was in Adam and consequently that the vertue appearing in the acting of Faith must be conceived as greater than what could have appeared in Adam's full obedience who had nothing within to oppose him or prove a remora in his way As it would argue more valour for a weak souldier to go a quarter of a mile fighting with his enemies in the way then for a giant to go twentie miles wherein he should meet with no opposition But though the proportion were granted to be greater betwixt the reward and Adam's Obedience than is betwixt the reward Faith yet there must be will be a proportion granted for majus minus non variant speciem degrees make no variation in kinde 2 Can or will it be said that God had given the perfect obeyer no more than he had in some sort at least deserved if we should suppose there had been no promise made of such a reward to obeyers or antecedently to a Covenant And if this cannot be said as it cannot be said by any I suppose who seriously consider the matter then the reward was made such only by God's free Condescension God had in that case given what they had deserved according to the Covenant made wherein such a reward was promised to obeyers and in justice bestowing it as a reward upon such as did fulfill the condition Now when Faith is said to have the same place in the New Covenant that Perfect Obedience had in the old and so the same Efficacy influence in the reward withall it is supposed that Faith is now no more the gift of God than Perfect Obedience was under the old Law is it not as true now that God giveth no more than what beleevers have by Faith at least in some sort deserved by vertue of the Compact New Covenant wherein this reward is promised as it would have been under the old Covenant And is it not hence also manifest that the New Covenant is made to be of the same Nature with the Old and that the reward is as well now of debt as is would have been by the Old Covenant Is it not also hence undeniable that hereby there is a proportion acknowledged in some sort betwixt Faith the Reward where is then the difference Let us see if his next reason will helpe here Secondly he saith because if they had made out their happiness that way they had done it out of themselves that is out of the strength of those abilities which were essential to their Natures in the strickest most proper sense that can be spoken of or applied to a creature their owne Ans. 1 When he supposeth as we saw in the Exception the act of Beleeving to be from a mans self must we not also say that the beleever making out his happiness this way doth it out of himself though not out of the strength of abilities essential to his Nature 2 I much doubt if those abilities if he speak of moral abilities as he must or speak nothing to the purpose can be said to have been essential to mans Nature for then it would follow that man after he lost these abilities as it must be granted he did when he fell was no more a compleet man wanting something that was essential to his nature These abilities may be said to have been natural or con-natural to him considering the state the Lord thought good to create him in and so not meerly supernatural but how they can be said to have been Essential to his Nature I see not 2 When God gave Adam these Abilities and thereby furnished him with a sufficient stock was he not to acknowledge God for all that he did or was he afterward to act without dependance upon or influence from God the first Cause If not as it is confessed when it is said to be so only in a sense that can agree to a creature and when Faith is here supposed to be from mans self acting in the same dependance on God and receiving the same influence from him as the first Cause may not Faith also be said to be mans own in as strick
Conscience as Drunkeness horedome c. have been glad enough of such doctrine forward enough to beleeve that there is nothing in man that in any part can justifie him or that is any part of Righteousness but it is all out of us in Christ therefore they are as justifiable as any But Conscience will not let them beleeve it as they desire Ans. To this cannot answere not knowing nor having acquaintance with those poor sinners Yet this I may say others will say the same with me that Mr. Baxter's way is that which I finde more relishing unto carnal Souls than the self denying way of the Gospel which we use to preach And that the way which Mr. Baxter is not satisfied with is the way that is most pleasant acceptable unto the truely gracious and rightly exercised Souls But surder what of all this Knoweth not Mr. Baxter that some can turn the grace of God into lasciviousness Must therefore the mountains be removed for them He saith Moreover n. 185. It is arrogant folly to divide tho praise of any good act between God man to say God is to have so many parts man so many for the whole is due to God yet some is due to man for man holdeth his honour only in Subordination to God not dividedly in Co-ordination And therefore all is due to God for that which is Mans is God's because we have nothing but what we have received But he that arrogateth any of the honour due to God or Christ ●ffendeth Ans. If it be thus Mr. Baxter is the more to blame in being dissatisfied with such as are but expressing their care that God have all his due and that man do not proudly arrogat to himself any of that honour glory which is due to God alone And if Mr. Baxter knoweth not that there is a strong propension in corrupt nature to spoil God of his glory he knoweth nothing And wo to such as would indulge nature in this Sacrilege Them that honour God He will honour What honour is justly due unto man in subordination unto God none of those I suppose whom Mr. Baxter here opposeth will grudge him of but all their care is to have God's due keeped for himself that is all it is not commendable in any to oppose them in this But next he saith n. 186. If all had been taken from God's honour which had been given to the creature God would have made nothing or made nothing good heaven earth all the world would derogate from his honour and none of his works should be praised And the better any man is the more he would dishonour God the wickeder the less But he made all good and is glorious in the glory honourable in the honour of all to justifie the holiness of his servants is to justifie him Ans. All this is little or nothing to the purpose for such as are carefull that man rob not God of his glory do not deny the honour due to the creature knowing that when honour is given to the creature upon a right ground and in the right manner it redounded unto the honour of the Creator But who knoweth not how ready the Creature is to steal into the throne of God and how ready men are to transcend● and transgress all due limites And is it not saifest to keep far from such a dangerous precipice Is it to edification thus to gratifie with our pleadings proud Nature and to blow at this fire of corruption that the Saints have dailyhard work about to suppress exstinguish Must we thus on so small occasions plead so stoutly for man pretend to plead for God too He addeth next n. 187. If these Teachers mean that no man hath any power freely to specifie the acts of his own will by any other help of God besides necessitating predetermining premotion so that every man doth all that he can do no man can do more than he doth They di honoure God by denying him to be the Creator of that f●ee power which is essential to man which God himself accounteth it his honour to creat And they feigne God to damne blame all that are damned blamed for as great impossibilities as if they were damned blamed for not making a world or for not being Angels Ans. This is not a fit place to treate of that Question of Predetermination though Mr. Baxter pull it in here by the eares It is enough for us that we see now whither all that Mr. Baxter hath here been saying tendeth even to give unto Man the glory of all the good he doth of his Faith Repentance Love of God obedience perseverance in the first chiefe immediat ●●ace for by his own Natural Power he did freely specifie the acts of his own will and so beleeved when he might have rejected the Gospel Loved God Christ when he might have hated both Repented when he might have remained impenitent Converted himself when he might have remained in his former state Mr. Baxter maketh no difference of acts here and so his words must be looked on as meaned of supernatural acts as well as of Natural that without any predetermining grace or motion of God This glory shall we never yeeld to be due unto man Let Mr. Baxter load the Doctrine of Predetermining grace with all the reproaches and absurdities he can invent He needs not think now to restrick his opinion of denying Predetermination unto natural acts for as the good spoken of by those he here opposeth is supernatural good as such so his discourse here is expressive enough of this And thus the cause is yeelded unto Pelagians Iesuits Arminians and the crown is put upon the head of man and he is to honour praise himself for what good he doth for all began at his own self-determining power will and the Almighty himself could not have bowed predetermined his will except he had overturned the course of Nature destroyed that free power which is essential to man And thus it is made to be to the honour of God to creat a Creature that is absolute Lord Master of all his own actions so must be the first Cause of his own actions as to their specifick moral nature what is this but to make man an independent Creature as to his actions consequently a God to himself Mr. Baxter hinteth some other help of God besides Predetermination but what that is he telleth us not is it his Concourse From this the same inconveniences will flow that flow from Predetermination And beside Mr. Baxter seemeth to incline more to Durandus's his opinion A dola's which even the Jesuites are ashamed to owne and his friend D. Strang doth directly confute as loving to set man yet higher up than they dar do Doth Mr. Baxter think that it is essential to man to have such a free