Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	justification_n	law_n	work_n	3,179	5	6.5237	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A97212	Caleb's inheritance in Canaan: by grace, not works, an answer to a book entituled The doctrine of baptism, and distinction of the covenants, lately published by Tho. Patient: wherein a review is taken, I. Of his four essentials, and they fully answered; ergo II. Dipping proved no gospel practice, from cleer scripture. III. His ten arguments for dipping refuted. IV. The two covenants answered, and circumcision proved a covenant of grace. V. His seven arguments to prove it a covenant of works, answered. VI. His four arguments to prove it a seale onely to Abraham, answered: and the contrary proved. VII. The seven fundamentals that he pretends to be destroyed by taking infants into covenant, cleeered; and the aspersion proved false. VIII. A reply to his answer given to our usual scriptures. For infant-subjects of the kingdom, in all which infant-baptism is cleered, and that ordinance justifyed, / by E.W. a member of the army in Ireland.	Warren, Edward, Member of the army in Ireland.	1655 (1655)	Wing W956; Thomason E856_2; ESTC R9139	117,844	134

God did so much priviledge them above others was that all his might believe but yet some did not implying that some did i. e. many of them were justifyed T●erefore ch 4. 9. he draws t●wards a result cometh this blessedness then upon the Circumcision onely or upon the uncircumcision also how was it then reckoned i. e. If Abraham was justifyed in uncircumcision then the righteousness of Faith comes not upon the Circumcision onely and ver 12. To them who are not of the Circumcision onely and ver 16. Not to that seed onely which is of the Law And then the Apostle concludes ver 23. that it was not written for Abrahams sake alone that righteousness was imputed to him but for us also i. e. Rom. and all other Gentiles if they believe to whom Abraham is as well a Father as to the Jews So that this triumphant place gives not the least continuance to his opinion either that Circumcision was a covenant of works or that it stands in direct opposition to saith or that God gave a covenant of works to Abraham to seal a covenant of Grace as he consequentially affirms p. 53. Therefore such an interpretation as he hath given of this place is most unsound The like answer is to be given to that place Ph●l 3.2 3 4. which he brings in pag. 55. as an Appendix to this second Argument the Philippians were also revolting to seek after Justification by the works of the Law the teachers of which Doctrine the Apostle calls dogs and evil-workers And if any had cause to boast of the law of Works he had more yet to him it was but dung and dogs meat all his priviledges of being a Jew a Pharisee Circumcised one that concerning the Law was blameless All this saith Paul I can boast of but what is this as to matter of justification which is by faith alone in Christ The like plain answer also is and may he given to that other place Gal. 3.3 which Church also were back sliding into the same error and therefore he calls them fools and tells them they were bewitched ch 5.1 And if they would be seeking Justification by works they should find they were mistaken For as many as sought to be justifyed by the works of the Law were under the curse And that no man by the works of the Law was ever justifyed is evident because the just shall live by Faith ver 10 11. And therefore he sends them also to Abrahams covenant For to Abraham and his seed were the promises made And ver 18. he shews them the ill-consequence that would follow if they thought to be justifyed by works For then the inheritance must be by works that is the inheritance of Abrahams promises both for the Land of Canaan and all other spiritual blessings If it were by the Law then it is no more of promises But God gave them to Abraham by promise And not by a covenant of works remember that Mr P. upon this again comes with the old Objection Wherefore then serveth the Law If a man may not be justifyed and saved by the works of the Law to what end and purpose then was it given The answer is it was added because of transgression that is to make sin look like sin and thereby to ingage Gods people then to walk close in the duties thereof and in ver 21. The Apostle directly confutes Mr. Patients Doctrine Is the Law then against the Promises or in opposition to the Promises God forbid By all which it appears that the Law was no covenant of Works nor is Circumcision or any part of the Law opposed to Faith as he would make us beheve but this was the great mistake of many in Primitive Churches by false teachers means And so of all Israel as it is also of Mr P. that the Law was given to the Church of the Jews as a covenant of works which God never intended to any such end or purpose CHAP. IX The next thing we come to is the several Arguments he brings in p. 53. to prove Circumcision onely a seal to Abraham answered I. FIrst because the righteousness of Faith which it sealed Abraham had it before the seal was given but his posterity could not be said to believe at eight days old Therefore it was a seal to him and not to them A. The seal was not annext to Abrahams Faith as Abrahams but to Gods covenant made with Abraham therefore it is called the seal of the righteousness of Faith So that what it sealed to Abraham was as he was an heir of the same Promises with Isaac and Jacob Heb. 11.9 therefore what it sealed to him as an heir it sealed to Isaac and Jacob and so to all believers as co-heirs of the same inheritance Heb. 6.17 2. If it was a seal of Abrahams Faith onely then it must be either as it was a weak faith or strong faith 1 It could not be the first because Abrahams faith is by the Apostle said not to be weak Rom. 4.19 20. 2. If it had been given as a badge of honor to Abrahams Faith as I have seen it affirmed in a piece or C. B. as a strong faith then it should have been given to Adam and Noah who had as strong faiths as Abraham and less Gospel-light then Abraham had to work it 3. There was no necessity to have Abrahams justification sealed more then Adams Seths Noahs or any of his predecessors especially if it be considered what M. P. himself grants that he was justifyed twenty four years before this seal was given therefore 4. Had it not been a seal to Isaac as well as to Abraham and so not onely a seal of Abrahams faith it might have been given upon the birth of Ishmael and Abraham need not have staid for a son of promise for it would have sealed as much then to Abraham as it did after if it was not the covenant-seal 5. Had it not been a seal to Isaac and so a part of the covenant then Isaacs not being circumcised had been no breach of the covenant directly against that place Gen. 17.10 For a seal the Apostle calls it and a sign God calls it So that had it onely been a seal of Abrahams Faith the covenant had not come sealed to Isaac because the seal reacht onely the Faith of Abraham and when he dyed the seal was broken off Therefore 6. It is a cleer truth that as the blessings of the covenant were made to Abraham by Promise and to his seed so Gods main drift being to make those covenant-blessings sure to all the heirs of Promise Heb. 6.17 he therefore deals as a man that would be believed First he promise● secondly he swears to confirm that Promise Thirdly he seals what he hath promised So the seal becomes the covenant-seal as the oath is the Covenants oath and what God promised to Abraham he promised to his seed and what he confirmed by oath to Abraham he confirmed to his