Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	adam_n	sin_n	wage_n	4,026	5	11.2119	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A39120	Vindiciæ justificationis gratuitæ = Justification without conditions, or, The free justification of a sinner : explained, confirmed, and vindicated, from the exceptions, objections, and seeming absurdities, which are cast upon it, by the assertors of conditional justification : more especially from the attempts of Mr. B. Woodbridge in his sermon, entituled (Justification by faith), of Mr. Cranford in his Epistle to the reader, and of Mr. Baxter in some passages, which relate to the same matter : wherein also, the absoluteness of the New Covenant is proved, and the arguments against it, are disproved / by W. Eyre ...	Eyre, William, 1612 or 13-1670.; Owen, John, 1616-1683.	1654 (1654)	Wing E3947A; ESTC R40198	198,474	230

in Christ nor any more benefit by his death then reprobates till they did believe and that they are but dreamers who do conceit the contrary I know not what could be spoken more contradictory to many plain Scriptures which shall be mentioned anone more derogatory to the full atonement which Christ hath made by his Death and more disconsolatory to the souls of men in laying the whole weight of their Salvation upon an uncertain condition of their own performing And therefore after the Exercise was fully ended I desired the Minister that Preached that with his leave and the patience of the Congregation I might remonstrate the insufficiency of his Grounds or Reasons to uphold the Doctrine he had delivered three of which I took more especial notice of One was drawn from the parallel between the first and the second Adam As men said he are not guilty of Adams sin till they have a Being so the Elect have no benefit by Christ till they have a Being whereunto he added those old Philosophical Maxims Non entis non sunt accidentia and Accidentis esse est inesse Another was That where there is no union there can be no communion but there is no union between Christ and the Elect before they believe Therefore the Elect have no communion and participation in the benefits of Christs death before they have a Being and do believe in him The proof of the Assumption was managed thus The union between Christ and the Saints is a personal union which cannot be supposed till their persons have a Being A third ground upon which he laid the greatest stress was to this purpose The Elect have no benefit by Christ before they do believe because God hath made a Covenant with his Son That they for whom he died should be admitted to partake of the Benefits of his death by Faith § 6. Whereunto my Replies were to this effect I told him that I conceived his first Allegation made very much against him For if the Righteousness of Christ doth come upon all the Elect unto Justification in the same manner as Adams sin came upon all men to condemnation as the Apostle shews it doth Rom. 5. Then it must follow That the Righteousness of Christ was reckoned or imputed to the Elect before they had a Being and then much more before they do believe in him for it is evident that Adams sin came upon all men to condemnation before they had a Being for by that first transgression sayes the Apostle vers 12. Sin entered into the world And more plainly Death passed upon all men The Reason follows because in him or in his loyns all have sinned Now as in Adam the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is All that shall perish were constituted sinners before they had a Being by reason of the imputation of his disobedience to them so in Christ the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All that shall be saved were constituted righteous his obedience being imputed unto them by God before they had any Being otherwise then in him as their Head and common Person There is a late Writer who tells us that there is not the same Reason for the imputation of Christs Righteousness to all the Elect before they believe as there is for the imputation of Adams sin unto his posterity before they have a Being Because says he the issues of the first Covenant fell upon Adams posterity in a natural and necessary way but the issues of Christs death do come to us in a supernatural way But this Reason seems to me to be of small validity for the issues of Adams disobedience came not upon his posterity by vertue of their natural propagation for then his sin should be imputed unto none until they are actually propagated and the sins of other parents should be imputed to their posterity as much as Adams because they descend as naturally from their immediate Parents as they do from Adam so that the issues of Adams sin may be said to descend to his posterity in a supernatural way i. e. By vertue of Gods Covenant which was made with him as a common person in behalf of all his posterity and in the same manner do the issues of Christs obedience descend unto Gods Elect by vertue of that Covenant which was made with Christ as a common person in their behalf and therefore unless they can shew any Proviso or restriction in the second Covenant more then in the first why life should not flow as immediately to the Elect from Christs obedience as death did from Adams disobedience the Argument will stand in force But to return to my discourse with Mr. Warren I added That those Logical axioms non entis c. have no force at all in the present Controversie It doth not follow that Christs Righteousness cannot be imputed to us before we have an actual created Being because accidents cannot subsist without their Subjects for as much as imputed Righteousness is not an accident inherent in us and consequently doth not necessarily require our existence Christ is the Subject of this Righteousness and the imputation of it is an act of God Now the Apostle hath observed That God in justifying and imputing Righteousness calleth things that are not as if they were Rom. 4.17 As the Righteousness of Christ was actually imputed to the Patriarks before it was wrought and our sins were actually imputed to Christ before they were committed so I see no inconvenience to say That Christs Righteousness is by God imputed to the Elect before they have a Being § 7. As to his second Reason before mentioned I excepted as I conceive but justly 1. Against his calling our union with Christ a personal union which seems to favor that absurd notion That a believer loseth not onely his own proper life but his personality also and is taken up into the Nature and Person of the Son of God Divines do call our union with Christ a Mystical and Spiritual union because it is secret and invisible to be apprehended by Faith and not by Sense or Reason but the Hypostatical or Personal union is proper unto Christ in whom the Divine and Humane Nature do constitute but one Person 2. Against his Assertion proposed Universally That there is no manner of union between Christ and the Elect before they do believe for though there be not that conjugal union between them which consists in the mutual consent of parties yet is there such a true and real union that by means thereof their sins do become Christs and Christs Righteousness is made theirs God from everlasting constituted and ordained Christ and all the Elect to be as it were one Heap or Lump one Vine one Body or Spiritual Corporation wherein Christ is the Head and they the Members Christ the Root and they the Branches Christ the First Fruits and they the residue of the Heap In respect of this union it is That they are said to be given

man any thing which is neither in the word nor necessarily deduced from it the testimony is false and sinful For understanding whereof we must know that there is a threefold act of conscience about sin the first When it witnesseth to us concerning the desert of sin the second When it witnesseth to us concerning the act of sin or the sins which we have done the third is When it witnesseth to us concerning our final state and condition before God Now if Conscience doth bear witness to a man concerning what he hath done and what is his desert in so doing it doth but its duty Rom. 1.34 But if it tell a man that for the sins which he hath done he is a damned Creature and must perish everlastingly such a Conscience is both penally and sinfully evil The Conscience of an unbeliever accuseth truly when it convinceth him of sin that Death eternal is the wages of it and that by the Law he can expect no other But if it proceeds to tell a man that his case is desperate and without hope it pronounceth a false sentence For though he be a Reprobate and consequently the sentence is true in it self yet it is a false testimony in him for as much as conscience witnesseth that which it cannot certainly know how much more is it a false testimony when the Conscience of an Elect person doth make such a conclusion against himself That God hath absolutely condemned him to Hell torments it is false in it self and false in him If it were a true sentence it were then impossible he should be saved For condemnation as Mr. W. confesseth a little after is opposed to Salvation and the Law saith not Now cursed but cursed for ever Matth. 25.41 And therefore I say If the Conscience of any sinner either Elect or Reprobate shall in this life pass such an absolute and peremptory sentence against himself that the curse of the Law shall be inflicted upon him he sins both against the Law and the Gospel 1 Against the Law by applying the Ministery thereof to a wrong end and not as God hath intended it for the Law was not given ex primaria intentione to condemn men but to further and advance the Ministery of the Gospel that men seeing what they are by nature and what they have deserved might flee for refuge unto Jesus Christ. Now when men hearing the Curse of the Law conclude that surely this must be their portion and that it is never the neerer for them that the Son of God hath shed his Blood for sinners they sin against the Law in regard the end of the Law is to cause them to flee unto Christ so that by making the sentence of the Law absolute they quite cross the design and intention of God in giving the Law 2 They deny the very tenor and substance of the Gospel which is That in Christ there is life eternal for sinners and for ought that they can know to the contrary for them as well as for others § 9. Though we say That the sentence of condemnation which men pass upon themselves in this life is false and erroneous yet are we innocent of those ugly consequences which Mr. W. would thrust upon us Of blinding mens eyes and hardening their hearts and searing up their consciences c. Which are more likely to follow upon an indiscreet application of the Law and mens making the voice thereof the definitive sentence of God upon all Transgressors which is the ready way to make men quite desperate and to harden their hearts in unbelief We hold it necessary That the Law should be preached to unbelievers in it● strictness rigor and inexorable severity that they may see there is no hope for them at all by the works of the Law yet we would have it preached as an Appendant to the Gospel not to drive men to despair but to believe and to flee to that Sanctuary which is opened in the Gospel whereas if it be published alone and as an absolute sentence it is a bar to Faith For if God doth condemn men who shall justifie them Christs merits will not save them whom God doth condemn witness Reprobate Men and Angels Unto whom there remaineth no sacrifice at all for sin § 10. His third Exception is That the condemnation with exception 3 which the unbeliever is condemned is expressed John 3.36 by the abiding of Gods wrath upon him Therefore we say no Elect unbeliever is condemned of God because the wrath of God doth not abide upon him The condemnation wherewith the unbeliever i. e. The final unbeliever is condemned is indeed the abiding of Gods wrath that is he shall die everlastingly for it is opposed to everlasting life but what is this to the Elect who are not final unbelievers § 11. His fourth and last is That the condemnation of unbelievers exception 4 is opposed to Salvation John 3.17 And surely the condemnation that is opposed to Salvation is more then the condemnation of a mans own conscience c. I answer 1. That the condemnation opposed to Salvation is damnation and then by Mr. Woodbridges Argument the Elect because they are sometimes unbelievers must all be damned But 2. this rather shews as I said before that by him that believeth not is meant he that believeth not at all CHAP. XII Wherein Mr. Woodbridges third fourth and fifth Arguments are answered HIs third Argument is drawn from the several comparisons by which Justification by Faith is illustrated Sometimes it is compared to the Israelites looking up to the Brazen Serpent for healing Joh. 3.14 Numb 21 8. As then they were not first healed and then looked up to see what healed them but they did first look upon the Serpent and then they were healed Even so it is the Will of God that whosoever seeth and believeth the Son shall be justified John 6.40 Sometimes Faith is compared to eating and Justification to the nourishment which we receive by our meat c. To which I answer 1. That comparisons prove nothing unless they are framed by the Holy Ghost for the thing in question Now I utterly deny that it was the intent of the Holy Ghost in either of these comparisons to shew in what order or method we are justified in the sight of God 2. The stinging of the fiery Serpents did plainly shadow forth the effects of the Law in Conscience The Law by revealing the wrath of God against all unrighteousness stings and wounds mens consciences for which cause it is called a fiery Law Deut. 33.2 To wit from its effects because it doth as it were kindle a fire in mens bones they have no rest in their souls until these wounds are healed Now as the Israelites when they were stung by those fiery Serpents found no ease till they looked up unto the Brazen Serpent So the soul that is smitten and wounded by the Ministery of the Law will never finde rest