Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	apostle_n	sin_n	wage_n	4,685	5	10.8916	5	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B22921	Justification onely upon a satisfaction, or, The necessity and verity of the satisfaction of Christ as the alone ground of remission of sin asserted & opened against the Socinians together with an appendix in vindication of a sermon preached on Heb. 2, 10, from the exceptions of H.W., in a pamphlet called The freeness of Gods grace in the forgiveness of sins by Jesus Christ / by Robert Ferguson.	Ferguson, Robert, d. 1714.	1668 (1668)	Wing F743; ESTC R37344	97,537	320

of it actual punishing with the principle whence it ariseth and proceeds actual punishing depends upon the divine decree but the inclination to punish is founded in the divine nature He adds that we men have a P. 12. natural right to our Limbs and he that maims us deserves to be punished yet notwithstanding we may forgive the offence Answ 1. There be cases wherein being wronged we cannot without injustice forgive but are bound to prosecute revenge upon the offender see pag. 53. of the former discourse 2. He argues from what a private person may do â—o what God who is the suâ—ream Rector and Governour â—ught to do whereas even â—mong men that which is lawâ—ull for a private person is not â—awfull for a Magistrate vid. â—bi supra 3. The Gentleman â—n this whole affair confounds â—us justitia power and equiâ—y We may have a physical â—ower to do that which we â—ave not a moral right to do â— Father may if we speak as â—o power connive at rebelliâ—n in his Son but it is moâ—ally wicked and destructive â—f Paternal Government to do â—o so here we do not argue â—bout the unlimited power of God what in a way of absoâ—uteness he may do but what in agreeableness to his â—ustice wisdom and holiness is â—it for him to do Whereas he adds that sins give P. 12. â—od a right to punish but that he may dispense with his right if hâ— please or else he were more impoâ—tent than we contemptible wormâ— are Answ 1. If this prove anâ— thing it will prove more thaâ— the Adversary desires namely that God may forgive thâ— obstinate and impenitent seeing we not only can but in somâ— cases are bound so to do buâ— the contrary hereof both Socâ—nus and Crellius affirm and I suppose the Disciple will not varâ— from his Masters 2. It is truâ— that he who sins gives God â— right to punish him and thaâ— God may remit his right buâ— then it must be upon term which may secure his honour now it is against his honouâ— to do it otherwise than upoâ— the conditions we alledge anâ— upon these we affirm that iâ— demonstration of his grace hâ— doth it Neither is it througâ— impotency that God cannot otherwayes act but through infiniteness of perfection His next assault is upon my P. 13. Argument from the nature of God and the account that the Scriptures give us of it in reference to sin â—nd sinners to which purpose I â—ited 2 Thes 1. 6 7. upon which â—e replyes that God is said to be â—ighteous in recompencing rest to â—hem who are troubled as well as â—ribulation to them who trouble â—ut forasmuch as that is not from â—he necessity of Gods nature but â—rom his merciful determination â—o neither is this from the incliâ—ation of his nature but the pleaâ—ure of his will Answ 1. God having proâ—ised to reward obedience â—annot without faileur in his veâ—acity and truth but perform â—t for though his promise was â—n act of grace yet the keeping â—f it is an act of justice and therefore the Scripture asserts that God cannot otherwise do without being false and unrighteous Heb. 6. 10. 2 Tim. 4. 8. and by consequence God having threatned to punish sin is obliged by his veracity to do no less his truth is as prevalent with him in the one case as iâ— the other so that this exception is so far from prejudicing us that it clearly overthrows his cause who brought it 2. God being infinitely good is enclined by his nature to love vertue and though it were noâ— against his justice not to rewarâ— it forasmuch as it is impossiblâ— that a creature should lay an obligation upon its maker yet iâ— is that which his wisdom and goodness will not admit him to do How much more then is iâ— contrary to his nature not to punish sin that being formally against his justice as well as unbecoming his wisdom 3. We affirm that there is a difference betwixt obedience and sin as to the point of ones being punished and the other rewarded for â—e owe the utmost of Service â—o God as we are his creatures â—nd withall there is that in the â—ature of duty which deserves â—hat it should be pursued but â—n the contrary sin is so far from â—eing a debt which we owe to God that he commands us on the â—ighest perill to avoid it and â—here is nothing in the nature â—f sin that should invite us to â—ommission of it and withall â— is contrary both to Gods naâ—re and government and â—erefore though God be obliâ—d by his nature to punish sin â—t he is under no such obligaâ—on to reward obedience obeâ—ence being a debt we owe to â—od as our maker and ruler â—ereas sin is both an opposing his nature and a rebelling against his Rectorship The Apostle asserts the same distinction Rom. 6. 23. for the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. The next attempt is upon my P. 13. arguing for the necessity of sins punishment from the sense and notion which the Heathens without revelation have of it Against which he excepts that the same light taughâ— them that God was merciful pardoning sin without a satisfaction Answ If we consider in thiâ— affair the sentiments of the Heathen our Adversaries havâ— clearly the disadvantage for iâ— is most certain that they believed God to be offended anâ— therefore sought by costly offerings lustrations c. to appeasâ— him 2. We readily granâ— that the Heathens had somâ— light of Gods being mercifulâ— herein he left himself nowhere without a witness Act. 14. 17. and the common discoveries which he made of his goodness were intended in a kind of objective way and had a great tendency and usefulness to that purpose to lead us to Repentance Rom. 1. 19 20. Rom. 2. 4. but that they had any notion of Gods pardoning sin without satisfaction we deny and challenge him to prove it if he can yea their whole Worship implyed the contrary to what end were all their Sacrifices but upon a steady belief of Gods being angry to attone him It is very remarkable that of all the parts and principles of justified Worship-Priesthood and Sacrifice made the largest spread there being scarce any People or Nation which hath arrived to our knowledge among whom we do not find some Prints and footsteps of them And though the Heathens mistook the right end of Sacrifices yet the first Rise of them among them was some traditional conveyance from the Church to whom God enjoyned them as Types of the great Sacrifice of the Messiah As to what the Gentleman alledgeth in reference to the Ninivites it is altogether impertinent 1. In that it was but Gods withholding of a temporal judgment and that also but for a time for about forty years after they were destroyed and their City taken and overthrown 2. All the mercy they could suppose in God was

prohibition but there are other things naturally evil without any enacting will of God about them As to love fear and reverence God are duties founded in our very natures to which we had stood obliged though there had never been any positive precept of God enjoining Dic ergo cur adulterium male steri putes an quia id facere lex vetat non sane ideo malum est quia vetatur lege sed ideo vetatur lege quia malum August li. 1. de libero Arbit them So to deny or hate God are essentially evil previously to any prohibition of God about them otherwise they might have been duties supposing God had commanded them which he might have done if they were in themselves things indifferent and became evil only from his free prohibition but that these could have heen duties I think no man dare say that knows whereof he affirms As there is an eternal comeliness that a reasonable creature should love and honour God so there is an everlasting indecency and horridness that a rational soul should hate or contemn him That these things are good and evil doth not depend so much on God's will as his nature and for God to will that the one should be bad and the other good were for him to change his holy and unchangeable nature which is impossible he cannot do it not through any defect but through infiniteness of perfection see 2 Tim. 2. 13. Tit. 1. 2. It being then obtained that there were somethings evil antecedently to any determination of God's will about them Si non reddit faciendo quod debet reddet patiendo quod debet August Nemo malus felix Juven it naturally follows that there belonged a dueness of punishment to those things there being an indispensable connexion betwixt moral evil and physical He that does ill deserves to suffer ill Neither divine wisdome nor righteousness can allow that sin and impunity should for ever dwell together It is the highest point of reason that he who provokes God should forfeit his favour and feel his anger and if so then without a satisfaction it cannot be otherwise for the justice of God requires that every thing should have its due though it be under the Freedome of God's will whether he will punish sin in the person of the sinner or the surety yet it is not under the freedom of his will whether he will punish sin or not Though the putting forth of justice in these or in other effects be under the liberty of the Divine will yet the punishing of sin in a way of vindictive justice is not but it results necessarily from the nature of sin to which punishment is indispensably due 2. It further appears if we consider the nature of God and the account Scripture gives us of it with reference to sin and sinners He is every where represented as hating them Psal 5. 4 6 7. Thou hast no pleasure in wickedness thou hatest the workers of iniquity Jer. 44. 4. Do not the abominable thing which I hate Psal 11. 5. The wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth See Deut. 12. 31. Mal. 2. 16. Zech. 11. 8. Levit. 16. 30. Levit. 20. 23. c. and why doth God abhort and loath sin and sinners is it only from the determination of his will he hath decreed and determined so No not only so but from the purity and justice of his nature because without ceasing to be a holy and righteous God he cannot do otherwise Hab. 1 13. Thou art of purâ—r eyes than to behold iniquity and canst not look on evil Josh 24. 19. Ye cannot serve the Lord for he is an holy God he is a jealous God he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins The principle in God by virtue of which he punisheth sin is not so much any free act of his will as the justice and purity of his nature See 2 Thes 1. 6. It is a righteous thing with God to recompence tribulation to them that trouble you Rom. 2. 5. Rev. 16. 5 7. Rev. 19. 11. Justice in God is a property of his nature See Heb. 10 30 31. Nahum 1 3. Deut 4. 24. Num. 14. 18. as well as his mercy and goodness are Exod. 34. 7. Exod. 20 5. It is a contradiction to suppose a God and not suppose him just there is no possibility of framing a notion of God without including justice in it And if it were not thus it is not imaginable how the heathens should come to have an ingraft notion of God's punishing sin for what depends meerly upon the will of God is no other ways to be known but by revelaâ—ion but that the Gentiles without revelation are under a knowâ—edge that God will punish sin â—he Apostle informs us Rom. 1. â—2 Knowing the judgments of God â—hat they which commit such things â—re worthy of death It was from â—ence that their accusations of â—onscience arose Rom. 2. 15. From â—ence also sprung their several enâ—eavours and attempts to appease God by lustrations hecatombs sacrifices c. From all which iâ— clearly follows that vindictive justice is an essential property oâ— God If justice be to give everâ— thing its due we must needs ascribâ— it to God unless we will supposâ— him to act contrary to the principles and measures of all equity If in man it be a virtue and perfection becoming a rational nature we must either give it to God or suppose him to be an unreasonable Being 3. This may be further strengthened if we consider God actinâ— towards us as Supream Governor Ruler and Judge God havinâ— created Man a rational creature behoved to give him a law It iâ— a contradiction for a man to be â— man and not obliedged to love fear and obey God These thingâ— man became obliedged to without any other constitution of God will about him save only his making him a man though God mighâ— â—ave chosen whether he would â—ave made such a creature as man â—r not yet on supposition that he â—akes such a creature it necesâ—arily results from his very nature â—hat he should reverence love â—nd serve God Now this being â—nce established that man beâ—oved to be under a law it as neâ—essarily follows that God as the â—oly and just Governour of the â—orld should make punishment â—ue to him in case he broke that â—w Duety being once constiâ—ted though there had been no â—enalty annexed to the law yet â—e dueness of punishment ariseth â—om the nature of sin Reatus â—lpae reatus poenae howsoâ—er they may be separable in some â—ses in humane laws they are not â— in divine In brief if there â—ere not penalties annexed to â—ws they would be contemptible â—ings and Government would be â—t an empty notion Now the dueness of punishment beiâ— granted in case of sin It followâ— by a like necessity that in case punishment become actually due God as righteous Judge and Gâ—vernour should execute it Geâ— 18. 25.

in a state of friendship 2. In the constituting and proclaiming in the Gospel that whoever believes is justified As a person is condemned by a law and said to be condemned when the law condemns him so we are justified by the Gospel patent and may be said to be so when that Charter declares us justified which it doth if we believe Now the effects of this are a non-imputation of sin and a donation of a right to life our obligation to punishment is dissolved and we are vested with a title to life 1. Sin shall never be charged upon us in the legal guilt of it Rom. 8. 1 33 34. The legal guilt of all sins past is removed formally and the legal guilt of all sins to come is removed virtually That is thus justification takes of legal guilt where once it was and keeps it of where else it would be And 1. It is no more harsh that sins should be legally disimputed to us before committed than that they should be legally imputed to Christ before committed which all the sins of the elect who have lived and are yet to live since the death of Christ were 2. Because the guilt of sin may be as well disimputed to believers before committed by them as the satisfaction of Christ was imputed to believers before made by him which it was to all the Old Testament Saints 2. Being constituted righteous by having the righteousness of Christ accounted ours ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ only our obligation to punishment is â—issolved but there also emergeth â—nd ariseth a new title to life Christ purchased not only redemâ—tion from wrath but a right to â—he heavenly inheritance And this â—hall suffice at least at present to â—ave been discoursed upon this whole affair AN APPENDIX In vindication of the Satisfaction of Christ from thâ— frivolous Objections of â— late Socinian Pamphletâ— made against a Sermon oâ— mine preached at thâ— Morning Lecture SECT I. The Title examined The Scripturâ— prefixed proved destructive of thâ— which they were brought to establish IT is not needful to give aâ— further account of the inducâ—ments and grounds of â— Preaching upon that subject sâ— what the Preface to the foregoing discourse intimates The cost of that exercise was before hand considered and whatever may be the consequences of it I hope to have satisfaction and peace in the bearing and encountring of them The party who hath appeared in opposition to the doctrine then held forth hath from what motives himself best knows been pleased to conceal his name and therefore seeing it may be omitted without prejudice to the cause â— manage I shall not concern my self about him though I could particularly declare him and assign his character Only it had been â—ut ingenuous when he had published the name of another and in â—hat exposed him to the law to â—ave given a more particular account of himself than what can meerly be gathered from two nuâ—erical letters wherein he hath eiâ—her endeavoured or may be able to wrong me I pardon him but what he hath attemped in opposition to the truth cannot in consistency to conscience and duty be overlookt The Title of his Book is very specious for what can more invite a Reader than the Freeness of God's grace in the forgiveness of sins by Jesus Christ But all is not gold which glisters a Box of poison may have a fair inscription the Prince of Darkness transforms himself into and desires to pass for an Angel of Light Error loves to appear in the garb oâ— truth I need not to tell whose character that is deceiving and being deceived 2 Tim. 3. 13. But we shall endeavour to unmaskâ— them here by animadverting these three things 1. That it is the great endeavouâ— of these men to present us as enemies to the grace of God Whereas 1. There is nothing we desirâ— more to exalt and admire and whatever doctrine of ours either directly or indirectly reflects upon the Freeness of God's Grace we disclaime and renounce it but we boldly affirme the Grace of God to be as free in the forgiveness of sin upon a satisfaction as it would have been if it had been possible to have forgiven sin without a satisfaction and how it is so you may see opened at large from page 23. to page 30. of the preceeding discourse 2. We aâ—sert our adversaries to be in this particular the only men who are tardy in that they establish justification by works which the Apostle every where excludes as opposite to and in this business utterly destructive of grace Eph. 2. 8 9. Rom. 11 6. 2. We would have observed that it is the method of these Gentlemen â—o cry up the grace of God to the â—verthrow of his holiness and righteâ—usness We acknowledge God to be infinitely gracious but withal we affirme to be infinitely pure and just We dare not exalt one perfection of God to the diminution of another We know God cannot be gracious if at the same time he may not be righteous also God can as soon cease to be God as that one property of his nature should be exalted to the dishonour of the rest Having therefore in the foregoing discourse from page 38. to 51. demonstrated the inconsistency of forgiveness without a satisfaction with the truth justice and holiness of God it necessarily follows that there can be no such grace in God He cannot be kind to us so as to be cruel to himself 3. We take notice that according to the Socinian Divinity they might have as well stiled their Book the Freeness of God's Grace in the forgiveness of sins by Paul or some other of the Apostles as by Christ For that which they assign as the ground of God's forgiuing sins by Christ being only that he preached the doctrine of forgiveness and afterwards sealed the truth of it with his blood accords to Paul and other of the Apostles as well as to Christ for they Preached the same doctrine and that by immediate revelation and also confirmed the truth of it by martyrdome and death so that according to the opinion of these Gentlemen I see no cause but that they might have given their Book the title I alledge as well as that which they have given it The next thing which comes under consideration is the examination of the Scriptures which he prefixes And he could have quoted few in the whole Bible which are more destructive of his cause and herein God displays his wisdom that that whereof his adversaries hope most to serve their design proves utterly subversive of it The first is Rom. 3. 24. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ Now the opening of this Verse together with the two following will without any more ado sufficiently evidence how disserviceable it is to the design it was brought for We have in these three verses justification set sorth in all its parts and causes First the efficient impulsive cause of it in God Causa impulsiva

Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Text snippets containing the quad