Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	church_n	deny_v	true_a	1,490	5	5.4129	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A66343	The answer to the report, &c., which the united ministers appointed their committee to draw up, as in the preface also letters of the Right Reverend the Bishop of Worcester, and the Reverend Dr. Edwards to Mr. Williams, against whom their testimony was produced by Mr. Lob : and animadversions on Mr. Lob's defence of The report / by Daniel Williams.	Williams, Daniel, 1643?-1716.; Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699.; Edwards, John, 1637-1716.	1698 (1698)	Wing W2645; ESTC R9333	67,736	107

Works c. Should not make Christs satisfaction possible yea and affirm it as well as their words Viz. Christ put on the Person of Sinners and came into their room and stead to Answer for them the Obligations of the violated Law of Works Putting on the Person of Sinners can have no good sense beyond Christs coming into our room and stead which we have asserted the words for them have but the same import And seeing the violated Law obliged us to dye for our Violations of that Law if Christ in our stead Answered for our Violations of that Law for which it put us under those Obligations to Dye then Christ Dyed to Answer for us the obligations of that violated Law i. e. its obligations on us to dye for our sins to which Christs satisfaction which is the point in hand refers Answ. 4. From what we observe so oft repeated by the Reporter had he justly represented the Third Paper and dealt sincerely he must have reduced all his Reasons and Arguments to prove his heavy charge against us and to justify the Dissenters refusal of that Paper to this one Argument Viz. They who in a Paper expresly affirm and explain the satisfaction of Christ omitting to mention these words Christ took upon him the Person of Sinners do pervert deny and make the satisfaction of Christ imposible But the Presbyterians in the Third Paper expresly affirm and explain the satisfaction of Christ omitting to mention these words Christ took upon him the Person of Sinners Therefore the Presbyterians do in the Third Paper pervert deny and make the satisfaction of Christ impossible Upon this Argument the true weight of the Reporters cause and charge doth hang and if the Major be true the Conseqence will be that all the Churches of Christ in their Confessions pervert and deny and make impossible the satisfaction of Christ. For to our Remembrance these words Christ took on him the Person of Sinners are omitted in the Confessions of all the Churches and we had much more Reason to omit them when we knew for what End they are insisted on by such as the Reporter Arg 4. They impose a Sense in express Contradiction to the Letter and General Scope of Mr. Williams's Book that when he saith There is no Change of Persons between Christ and the Elect It could not be intended as a denial of a Change of Persons between Christ and us in the General Sense but only in opposition to his adversary he wrote against for in that very place he expressly affirms Christ suffered and dyed in our room and stead for his words are as exclusive of a Change of Persons in every Sense as words can be c. p 37. to 41. Gospel Truth first Edition Answ. 1. Mr. Williams no where saith there is not a Change of Persons in the Plural Number but of Person Singular yet the Paper as Subscribed made him to say the first however the Report doth change it now nor is this a small mistake with him when he takes a Change of Persons to refer thus to intelligent beings Viz. Christ dying in the Room of Condemned Sinners which he affirms But a Change of Person to denote a Change as to Office Acts Qualities Adjuncts c. Really inseparable and peculiar to either Christ on the one part or Men on the other as is plain by all his Arguments against a Change of Person p. 41. There is no Change of Person between Christ and the Elect for Christ was the Saviour and never ceased to be so we are the Saved and not the Saviours Christ was the Redeemer we the Redeemed and not the Redeemers Christ was he who by his own merits forgives us but never was forgiven we are forgiven and never had merits of our own to forgive our selves or others It 's profane Arrogance for us to pretend to his Prerogatives and it's Blasphemy to debase him among them who were Enemies without strength and sinners for whom he was the dying Sacrifice it 's enough that he reserving the peculiars of a Redeemer should agree to dye for our sins it is enough that we are pardoned for his sake when we deserved endless woe and are never capable of making the least Attonement Here you have all which Mr. Williams hath written against a Change of Person wherein is not a word against Change of Persons and it 's evident he took Change of Person in the afore-recited Sense Answ. 2. When he confutes the Sense wherein Dr. Crisp explains a Change of Person he must in denying his Sense deny it under that Phrase Change of Person of which the Dr. gave that Sense Take then the Doctors words Christ himself is not so Compleatly Righteous but we are as Righteous as he nor we so compleatly sinful but Christ became as compleatly sinful as we that very sinfulness that we were Christ is made that very sinfulness before God so that here is a direct change Christ takes our Person and Condition we take Christs Person and Condition with much of this sort p. 38. Here 's the Change of Person which Dr. Crisp affirms this is the change Mr. Williams denies Answ. 3. Mr. W. is so far from denying a change of Persons in the general Sense that in that Book he oft asserts and proves what the Orthodox intend by that Phrase yea in the very places where he denies a change of Person See p. 37.39 Christs sufferings and obedience were so in our stead that God cannot exact from us any other Atonement for Sin p. 42. He thus explains the Imputation of Christs sufferings to impute to one what is suffered by another is to esteem the one undertaken for in the sufferings of the other and to deal with him as if himself had suffered the same things p. 43. Had not Christ suffered for us we could not have been absolved for the sake of his sufferings p. 47. God hath provided for his Iustice and Honour in saving true Christians by the satisfaction of Christ p. 247. The Punishment of our Sins yea the Guilt of them as an obligation to punishment was laid upon Christ our Sponsor See p. 79.13 What words can more distinctly and properly express the Orthodox Sense of a change of Persons Answ. 4. His Cavils p. 9. against Mr. Williams as not affirming the Sense of a change of Persons tho he say Christ suffered and dyed in our room and stead are weak and individious for First Mr. Williams when he had a fit occasion as the Reporter knows duely asserts Christs suretyship and proves That Christ suffered not only for our good but in our stead and that he was a proper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See this at large Man made Righteous p. 91 c. Secondly The Racovian Catechism in the Amsterdam Edition and not only Modern Socinians affirm Christ dyed in our stead and Socinus Crelliu● and others asserted a change of Persons between Christ and us and the Sense in which the first