Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	bind_v	earth_n	loose_v	5,255	5	10.5190	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59035	The bowels of tender mercy sealed in the everlasting covenant wherein is set forth the nature, conditions and excellencies of it, and how a sinner should do to enter into it, and the danger of refusing this covenant-relation : also the treasures of grace, blessings, comforts, promises and priviledges that are comprized in the covenant of Gods free and rich mercy made in Jesus Christ with believers / by that faithful and reverend divine, Mr Obadiah Sedgwick ... ; perfected and intended for the press, therefore corrected and lately revised by himself, and published by his own manuscript ...	Sedgwick, Obadiah, 1600?-1658.	1661 (1661)	Wing S2366; ESTC R17565	1,095,711	784

forgiveness of any sin old or new but do urge Repentance in relation to forgiveness upon those very accounts which as they The grounds for it conceive the Scripture promises of forgiveness do require Now the Arguments produced for this opinion that God doth not pardon all sins past present and to come at once and together are these First Those very Covenant expressions respecting the pardon of sin which the former Opinion used to the contrary e. g. Heb. 8. 12. Their iniquities I will remember no more Not to remember iniquity any more doth say they in common sense suppose say they that that iniquity was before for if it never yet was it cannot be said to be remembred at all nor to be remembred any more So that passage in Jer. 31. 34. I will forgive their iniquity and Jer. 33. 8 I will pardon all their iniquities do suppose an iniquity or offence committed For if it be not yet committed how can it be properly said to be forgiven unless as Bishop Downham saith we will make God like the Pope who aforehand forgave sins Of the Coven Ch. 8 p. 119. to come which never yet were committed So Isa 43. 25. I am he that blotteth out thy transgressions where pardoning of sins is compared to the blotting out of debts entred into a book But say they debts which as yet never were made may not be entered into the book and therefore cannot be said to be blotted out and consequently sins yet to come cannot be said already to be pardoned Secondly other Sriptures purposely speaking of the forgiveness of sins have a restrainedness unto sins committed and look only at them Jer. 33. 8. I will pardon all their iniquities whereby they have sinned and whereby they have transgressed against me Mark have sinned and have transgressed respecting the sins past not what they shall commit which if already forgiven must have come in also which they have sinned and which they shall sin Ezek. 18. 22. All the transgressions that he hath committed shall not be mentioned unto him 1 Joh. 2. 1. If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father Here Christ makes intercession for sin as an Advocate but it is upon this supposition if any man sin as if sin must be committed before he makes Intercession for their pardon of it As in the Old Testament there were no sacrifices for any future sin but all the sacrifices for sin were for sins already committed so c. Thirdly These conditional qualifications which God himself makes with respect to the forgiveness of sins and therefore I wonder how any one dare to call them Popish and Antichristian they do necessarily suppose a precedent Commission of sins vide 2 Chron. 7. 14. If my people which were called by my Name shall humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked wayes then will I forgive their sinne 1 Joh. 1. 9. If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive our sins Prov. 28. 13. He that confesseth and forsaketh his sins shall finde mercy Acts 3. 19 Repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out Mark if my people shall humble themselves if they shall pray if they shall tu●n from their wicked wayes If we confess our sins c. All these penitential Qualifications which God makes Antecedents unto forgiveness do suppose a peculiar respect unto sins already committed for doth God put us to humble our hearts for s●n which we never yet committed or for sins only which we have committed doth God put it upon us to pray for mercy to pardon sins which never were or sins which have been would he have us to confess these sins which never yet were in being to offend him or only such whereby we have offended him doth he at any time enjoyn us to forsake and turn from sins which perhaps we never thought on much less actually fell into or else the sin in which we have walked and into which we have fallen Why then say they if these be required for forgiveness and these respect sins only that are past then all sins past present and to come are not pardoned at once Fourthly If all sins past present and to come are forgiven at once unto believers then no believer is to pray unto God for the forgiveness of any sin which he commits after he is once brought in to Christ yet Jesus Christ doth teach even believers to pray Forgive us our trespasses Matth. 6. 12. Luke 11. 4. For he teacheth them thus to pray who could upon good grounds call God their Father which none can but true Believers Here some do think to evade the strength of this Argument by distinguishing 'twixt pardon of sin and the manifestation of that pardon unto the soule They grant that Believers do pray for the pardon of their sins committed in respect of the manifestation thereof unto their consciences but not for any new act of remission as unto sin committed before God Unto which there is a double Reply 1. One that it cannot easily be demonstrated in Scripture that to pray for the forgiveness of sin is any where so to be taken as to mean only the manifestation of forgiveness and not the act of forgiveness And in the Petition before mentioned it seems it cannot hold For Christ teacheth us to pray unto God Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us now our forgiving of their trespasses is not only in way of manifestation to the trespasser but also in a real precedent act of condonation 2. The other is that the Saints in Scripture when they sinned against God did humbly acknowledge their sins and did earnestly pray unto God first for the pardon of those sins and next for the manifestation of that pardon e. g. David in Psal 51. 1. prayes expresly for the pardon of those great sins which he had committed Have mercy upon me O God according to thy loving-kindness according to the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions He useth the very same Phrase which God himself useth in his Covenant for the actual fogiving of sins I am he that blotteth out thy transgressions Isa 43. 25. so he blotteth out my transgressions and not for a meer manifestation only And after this he prayes for the manifestation and sense of the forgiveness of his sins in ver 8. Make me to hear joy and gladness that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoyce Fifthly It is possible that a believing person may fall into such a sin or sins of scandal for which he may be justly cast out from the visible Church and upon his neglect of Repentance or practice of Repentance he stands bound or loosed from his sin not only in earth but also in heaven for so Christ himself delivers it to us in Matth. 18. 18. Verily I say unto you whatsoever you shall binde on earth shall be bound in heaven and

whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven But this cannot possibly be if all his sins be already pardoned in heaven for then he is alwayes loosed and never bound in heaven This Argument is of that strength that I do not see how it can be answered for if upon the right sentence of the Church of Christ the offender is bound in heaven as well as on earth in respect of his sins then his sins are not all pardoned at once and if upon repentance he is loosed in heaven i. e. absolved and forgiven as well as loosed on earth thence also it follows that all his sins past present and to come are not at once forgiven in heaven take the one or the other or both still it shakes that Opinion of a forgivenesse of all sins at once Sixthly If all sins past present and to come are forgiven at once before they are repented of then a Regenerate and a justified person in the midst of his grossest sins as suppose Davids adultery and murder may joy and rejoyce as much in God and look on him as well pleased as when they do humble their soul and repent and seek his face To this one Francis Cornwell answers freely and plainly When sin is most In lib. of the difference between Legal and Evangelical repentance p. 54. prevalent and the heart is most hardened he speaks expresly of Regenerate and justified persons yet then can they glory in Christ Jesus with a large heart breaking forth into thanksgiving as Paul did Rom. 7. 25. I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Yea and he that commits a gross sin and doubteth the pardon of it committeth a double sin the one against his Sanctification and the other against his Justification And what though a believer usually upon the pag. 56. committing of gross sins doubts of his estate this is from a defect in faith and not from any Rule and Precept of Gods Word And that it is all one and alike unto God when a person is humbled or not humbled and when he repents and forsakes his gross sins or repents not of them but continues in them for all is already pardoned on Gods part c. But these strange deliveries are contrary 1. To the Word which in case of gross transgressio●● calls for humbling and mourning and repenting of the heart and weeping an●●●plication because God is dishonoured and displeased 2. To the exigence in all the children of God so fallen who thereupon have broken their peace and lost their joy and exceedingly interrupted their confidence with fear 3. To the Assertion of these very men who do hold that in case of gross transgression there must be deep humiliations to get assurance and joy Seventhly To these another Reason may be added and is added by some that forgiveness of sin is a judicial act in God as the contrary act of condemning is now the Judge neither condemns nor yet forgives offences which are not extant and which cannot be proved upon the Offender that ever he was guilty of them But when they are charged and pleaded then doth he condemn or acquit so it would be strange for a Judge to condemn one for faults not committed and so acquit a man for sins never in being and so not deserving punishment Eighthly Lastly the great and continual work of Christ in heaven as our Intercessor and Advocate 1 Joh. 1. 2. and the daily suing out of pardon in his Name and for his sake seems to carry much in it for the acquiring of daily pardon and continued forgiveness of sins His great work of Intercession and Advocater-ship surely it contains in it something more than to obtain an assurance that all is still pardoned Thus have I delievered unto you the two different Opinions with their several Arguments concerning this great Question whether all the sins of believers past present and to come are pardoned by God at once Now I shall make bold to deliver unto you my own thoughts concerning it and those different Opinions about it The truth concerning these different Opinions They agree in five particulars First I do observe that they do both agree in five particulars e. g. 1. That as to Gods eternal decree or purpose of forgivenesse all the sinnes of his people are forgiven God did not intend to forgive some of their sins and not the rest but an universal and full and compleat forgiveness was fixedly purposed and resolved on by God 2. That all the sins of his people in their absolute number from first to last were laid upon Christ who in the dayes of his suffering did meritoriously purchase perfect Remission of all their sins to be applied in future times to them and by them 3. That as soon as ever any person is brought into the Covenant by believing on Jesus Christ all his sins past whatsoever they have been they are actually forgiven unto him and God will never remember them any more 4. That as to the state of Justification there is a full and perfect remission of all sins considered under the differences of time past present and to come As in the state of condemnation there is not any one thing pardoned so in the state of Justification there is not any one sin but is pardoned for the estate of Justification is opposite to all condemnation and curse and wrath 5. That no Repentance or work of ours is a meritorious cause neither God nor any true believer looks on it as so of Justification or pardon of any sin neither the repentance which we call Initial neither that which we call Renewed we acknowledge no meritorious cause of pardon of sins but the blood of Christ Secondly The maine differences which I doe observe do rest in two The differences betwixt them things 1. One is that sins not yet committed are actually pardoned and we are to believe so say the one party not so say the other party untill committed or repented 2. Repentance is required say both of them but with this difference because sin is pardoned say the one but the other say that sin may be pardoned That we may have the comfortable sense and experience of pardon say the one that we may have the● 〈◊〉 forgiveness as well as the comfort of it say the other In this difference my own judgment inclines to that Opinion which holds That all the sins past of a Believer are at once forgiven and all his future sins are remitted unto him upon renewed acts of believing and repenting for Christs sake If that Opinion be true that Justification be one continuing or continued act this would reconcile all To me this Opinion 1. Hath clear grounds in the Scripture 2. Doth best suit with the Covenant which in this case still suits Faith and Repentance together 3. Doth best agree with the wayes which God still hath put his people upon in relation to forgiveness 4. And with the practice of the