Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	covenant_n	law_n	sin_n	4,869	5	5.4906	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

Subject in his Prayers Sermons and Peaceable behaviour and advices What Fetters are some in If once addressing the Late King by a few big words must Eternally Proclaim a Man an Hypocrite unless he be now a Non-juror Nonassociator Plotter and director of other Ministers in imitation of himself to pray so for the King as either of the two Kings may be intended if they must at all seem to Pray for King William I hope few will be gull'd into such a Character from the fancied obligations of former addresses tho some of them were highly inconsiderate nor any discouraged from persevering Loyalty by the forecited Aspersion This would admit enlargement which provocations might improve But I retain a respect sufficient to forbid it nor had I inserted the least hint at such things except as a warning against the like instances when His First-Rate Man is to Execute his Fiery threats and his very Learned Person already Roused alike obnoxious stretcheth forth his Claws Let Men take their way but the common interest will not long be Sacrificed ere some now imposed on will find out the Instruments and Designs of our Breaches I hope the Reverend Rebuker will Pardon my Interposal and that I acquainted him not therewith His abilities for a reply I acknowledge such that if these short hints serve for a foile to that he is preparing and in the interim abate the ill Impressions of Mr. Lobs attempt I shall Account these few hours well employed which otherwise had been more feelingly spent in resenting those base reflections that I am his Leader Master Principal and what else became scarce any Man besides Mr. Lob their Author Mr. Lob p. 8. owneth I asserted besides the effects made ours the Righteousness of Christ is imputed to Believers but adds I mean nothing by this grant Because I use a simile to illustrate the manner in Man made Righteous p. 77. If one give me my Liberty which he Voluntarily purchased for me at a dear rate He mediately gives me what he paid for my Ransom tho immediately he gives me my Liberty and a right thereto A. Had he Cited the Apodosis which is in the next words He had spoiled his suggestion I shall Contract what I there enlarge on I make Pardon and Adoption to be benefits or effects following upon the Imputation of Christs Righteousness And the Righteousness of Christ I distinguish into 1. His performance of the conditions of redemption 2. His right or jus adjudicatum by the Covenant of redemption to our Pardon and Adoption for his performance of the conditions adjusted in that Covenant The former I said is mediately imputed The latter I said is immediately imputed it 's reckoned to us when believers because it was acquired expressly for believers Iohn 3.16 Isa. 53.10 11. The judicial imputation of this right of Christ intervening the Righteousness of Christ as a performance of the conditions is imputed as our Plea for that Pardon it being the procuring cause of that right of Christs which is immediately imputed to us And this right I also distinguish from that which the Gospel-promise made to believers doth invest them in for the former right results immediately to Christ from the Covenant of Redemption and is subjectively in him tho imputed to us Whereas the promise he that believes shall be forgiven or saved not only supposeth the former Transactions and is the Instrument by which God imputeth Christs Righteousness to the believer But it also as a conditional promise giveth believers a right to Forgiveness whereof they are the immediate Subjects Here Mr. Lob may see the Vanity of his Objection it is not Pardon or such possessed effects that intermediate between Christs Righteousness and us nor only the right given by the Gospels conditional grant No it 's Christs own right and that imputed to us by God himself and that immediately to us And Pray Is Gods imputing to us Christs performance of the conditions so far as to be our Plea and Foundation of Claim no imputation of his Righteousness at all because the imputation of Christs acquired right Intervenes Nothing is left out but Gods Legal accounting us to have performed all that by which Christ merited and made Atonement Yet without this Proud assumption nothing will please Mr. Lob. Being so often pressed to it by Mr. Humfreys and Mr. Lob I will endeavour their satisfaction If Christ had acquired by his Death a Power indefinitely to forgive sins without a Compact determining either by Name or Qualification the Persons that should be Pardoned in the Virtue of his Death or only purchased the Gospel Covenant as conditionally offering Pardon I should agree with Mr. H. but it being otherwise I differ from him And add as the possessed effects are not properly imputed so I will not confine the support of my Faith ultimately and only to the Gospel conditional promise tho that 's infallible when God hath made the Compact between the Father and our Mediator to be my security and Christs performance of the conditions of that Compact to be my Plea with God among which conditions was what Answers the Law of Works which I have Transgressed Altho I own I must try my interest by Christs Gospel Law as what describeth the Person who is Entitled to Pardon and injoyneth us to be such with a promise of that interest In short a believer having for his Security and Plea the Gospel promise the Covenant of Redemption and the Value of Christs Death I 'll retain each and therefore still say Besides the effects possessed by me the Righteousness of Christ is imputed to me as above Accounted for On the other hand could I think it was by the Covenant of Works that Christ was constituted our surety so that his obligations to suffer the Punishment of our sins did immediately result from that Law And that we Sinners were Principals in Redemption Work and Christ such a surety as to be Ioint Party with us in that Work of Redemption And that the Law of Works required the Divine Nature to give a value to what it Accounted to be Righteousness And lastly that this Law promiseth Pardon to sinners for the sake of a Mediators sufferings I should then agree with Mr. Lob that we satisfied for our sin dyed and obeyed in Christs Person and he and we paid the Idem Nay be a full Crispian and say I was justified at the time of Christs Death I had nothing to do to become partaker of the effects of that Death I was as Righteous as Christ deny any proper forgiveness Nay own that Christ was really a sinner for I am sure the Law could immediately oblige no other to dye But I must disagree with Mr. Lob and them Because I am well perswaded God never proposed the Work of Redemption to Condemned Sinners but to Christ our Mediator Also that to the Redemption of Sinners God in Justice requiring for the Honour of his Violated Law that a perfect

take dying in our stead is as Metaphorical and Improper as the last do take a change of Persons in But if our Reporter finds a Socinian to use a Phrase explained in an ill Sense by themselves and others make use of that Phrase in a contrary Sense never so expressly his way is presently to charge upon them the use of that Phrase in the Socinian Sense the same dealings towards him were equally just when he useth the Phrases the Antinomians are wont to do Thirdly After all he hath said to make the stress of our cause against the Socinians to depend upon the Terms change of Persons c. An insight into that Controversy would convince him that there are other things which do fa● more certainly define that Controversy about the satisfaction Viz. Was Christ in his Death an Expiatory Sacrifice Did he make Atonement to the Justice of God Did Christ endure the Punishment of our Sins c. All these Mr. Williams in Gospel Truth asserts To what 's repeated before out of that Book we will add p. 7. Our sins were imputed to Christ with respect to the Guilt thereof so that he by the Fathers appointment and his own consent became obliged as Mediator to bear the Punishment of our Sins and he did bear those Punishments to the full satisfaction of Justice and to our Actual Remission when we believe If he that writes thus must Socinianize none are free besides the Antinomian● But what can be safely said in the Opinion of the Reporter who tells us p. 10. It was a Ridiculing Dr. Crisp when Mr. Williams shewing the ground of his mistakes saith p. 52. Because Christ suffered in our stead that the Fruit of his sufferings might be our deliverance from suffering and our being saved at last therefore he thinks there is a change of Person Which very words do evidence plainly that Mr. Williams by in our stead allows the sound Sense of a change of Persons while he opposeth Dr. Crisps Erroneous Sense of his change of Person and that Mr. W. took a change of Person and a change of Persons in a very different Sense tho the Disputer or Reporter seem not to distinguish between a Surrogation upon which an Innocent expiates anothers Crime and his becoming the very sinning Criminal or to use his own Metaphor with him He that is a surety to pay the Drunkards Debt must in Quality Nature and Condition be the Drunkard too Fourthly Whatever the Reporter saith of the Scope or offensiveness of that Book of Mr. William's called Gospel Truth Stated Those Brethren whom he calleth of biggest Name who Subscribed the first Paper have declared they intended not by that Paper to censure the passages against which the Dissenters objected but were so far from Condemning any Passage therein that they Subscribed the first Paper because they were sure that upon enquiry it would appear there was nothing in that Book of Mr. Williams's contrary to the Sense of that first Paper and they still as well as formerly declare it is an useful Book and that it 's the ca●se of truth it pleads and have given it under their hands that the State of Truth and Error is not at all enlarged or changed since they first Subscribed nor did they mean so in the first Paper but only that there were in the Book besides the State of Truth and Error several Explications and Arguments added thereunto nor indeed could the State of Truth and Error be enlarged or changed because as it is attested by several even of those sixteen that were the first who Subscribed to the first Edition the Book as far as it contained the State of Truth and Error was Printed before they Subscribed the Attestation nor do we know of any of the Subscribers of that Attestation who do dis-allow the said Book nor any whose Names are affixed thereto without their consent We shall conclude with these further remarks 1. Besides the mis-representation of the points in difference and of the Account given by us in the Third Paper of these Doctrines c. We could detect great mistakes as to Matters of Fact Some refused to Subscribe the first Paper as Mr. Slater some who say they never Subscribed it as Mr. Barker are yet set down as Subscribers others are said to express their approbation of it who vehemently declared their disallowance of it as Dr. Annesley c. The Reporter saith he cannot Learn there are five Pastors of Churches Dissenting from it when it 's Notorious to Persons more retired that from the first about Twenty Pastors of Churches Assented not yea we know not one of our Meeting who did Subscribe it but were soon convinced that an Explication of it was needful and therefore agreed to the Third Paper Other mistakes might be added 2. It was unjust and disingenuous for the Reporter to Publish this first Paper with the Names of our Brethren affixed thereto They from a Zeal for Union condescended to prepare a way for it by Subscribing but then they declared they Subscribed not as their conclusive Act but agreed thereto upon condition the Meeting of the United Ministers would approve of it and to whom they did wholly refer it Yet he publisheth it as a consummate Instrument tho the Copy was neve deliver'd as such and the Original not at all and this without their conse●t and after he knew they had laid it aside and agreed to another Paper as the Instrument of Union Such a course must Minister Jealousie that the Reporter when Active in carrying on that Paper did more design a breach among the United than Union with the Dissenters and that his disappointment produceth this report when he saw our Union among our selves Consolidated of late and that one of our Articles is to this effect that we 'll suffer none commonly called Lay-men to Preach in our Pulpits 3. The Reporter hath no reason to glory in any of our Brethrens agreement with him in Doctrine in any point wherein the first Paper differs from the third by which third Paper they supply what was wanting and explain what was doubtfull in the first Paper and determine their sense of those Doctrines nor did they ever intend the weight of their Assertions should be laid upon any unscriptnrall words but upon the orthodox sense of them which our Paper stateth 4. It 's matter of grief to us that in opposiition to the preface of both Papers Law-terms and humane forms of speech in Doctrines so fully expressed in the Gospel and capable of being expressed in the words used and appointed by the Holy Ghost should be made Engines of Division among persons who agree in the sense of such phrases and yet dare not say that God designed to limit or extend his Revelations by what such terms may signify in humane Laws or Usages especially when they need Explications and Limitations to prevent what 's grosly erroneous to instance Christ took on him the person of Sinners

them I will liken him to a wise Man who built his House upon a ●ock c. Mat. 7.24 Not he that believes that he is one of those who is made Compleatly Righteous by a Change of Persons without any Change of Temper or Disposition of Mind He never promises the least Degree of Happiness to such but still insists on our own Endeavours By striving to enter in at the straight Gate which St. Paul Calls working out our own Salvation with Fear and Trembling and St. Peter giving all Diligence to make our Calling and Election sure For saith he If ye do these things ye shall never Fall Do not these Expressions Note the necessity of the Performance of Conditions on our side And therefore all Imaginary Notions of such a Change of Persons as hath no Regard to any Acts of ours is wholly Repugnant to the main Scope and Design of the Gospel I meddle not with the dispute about the Mortal Law which must continue to oblige us as long as the Reason of it continues but the main Argument to me is from the Gospel as it is delivered by Christ and his Apostles who certainly understood the Substance and Design of it far better than Dr. Crisp or the Reporter doth What was Transacted between the Father and the Son we know no more than they have Revealed to us and we know they had no Design to Impose upon Mankind by laying so much weight upon such Conditions as God had no Regard to and by Concealing from them such a Change of Persons as made them Compleatly Righteous without any Act of theirs Men could never be Reconciled to the just Veneration and Esteem we have of the Sacred Penmen of the Scriptures nor to their Knowledge of the Mysteries of the Gospel nor to their Fidelity in declaring them for the Good of Mankind So that if we find nothing of this Change of Persons in their Writings and so much as is utterly inconsistent with it we have all the Reason in the World to Reject it This Notion of the Change of Persons is attended with very bad Consequences Which I do not charge on those who do not see them or are carrried by some higher Principles above them but we are not to Judge of Persons but of Things and the Natural Tendency of Principles And so the Change of Persons in this Sense hath these very had Consequences That it is apt to Lessen our Reverence of the Divine Perfections our just Sense of the Differences of Good and Evil Our Obligations to all sorts of Duties It tends to the Disparagement of that Free Grace they pretend to Exalt and Exposes the Gospel to the Reproach and Contempt of Infidels and leaves the Minds of those who embrace it under Great Temptations to Presumption These things I can only mention because you des●red a short Answer to your Questions and I have brought it into as narrow a Compass as I could I am Sir Your Faithful Friend and Servant ED. WIGORN Nov. 10. 97. The Learued Doctor Edwards's Answer to the same Three Questions in a Letter to Mr. Williams occasioned by Mr. Lob's Remarks Wherein he pretends the Doctor 's Preservative against Socinianism condemns Mr. Williams's Iudgment concerning a change of Persons SIR I Have perused the Passages which you refer to viz. Gospel-Truth stated p. 37 40. the places objected among the rest besides severel other parts of your Books though I have not as yet had Leisure sufficient to read them over However I have read enough to know your Opinion and to understand how you state the Matter in debate between you and your Antinomian Adversaries and thereby am sufficiently instructed to answer your Queries To the First therefore I say That when speaking of the Sufferings of our Saviour I assert as other Divines usually do a Permutation of Persons I mean no more than what you affirm viz. That Christ not only died for the good but likewise vice or loco peccatorum in the room and place of Sinners But whe● we assert an Exchange or Permutation of Persons this must always be understood under such Restrictions and Limitations as may help us to avoid those two Dangerous Errors which the Antinomians have Fallen into And therefore First We must affirm we mean no more thereby then an obligation to Punishment which he no otherwise Contracted then by his own Free and Voluntary consent and undertaking to undergo that Punishment which the Law threatned and our Sins deserved Viz. Death But this must by no means be so far misconstrued as to imagine that thereby the Filth and Turpitude of our sins were Transferred upon him For tho in the former Sense he is said to be made sin for us yet in the latter he still continued Holy Harmless Undefiled separate from Sinners and at an Eternal distance from them Neither Secondly Must this Permutation be extended so far as to imply a Reciprocal Exchange of Persons Viz. Of us Sinners into the Room and Place of Christ As if God did look upon us as doing all that Christ did and consequently that we do Merit Pardon attone Justice compleatly satisfy and fulfill the Law so that we are actually discharged from Punishment without more ado No we continue still under the sentence of the Law Notwithstanding all that Christ did to free us from it till we perform those Conditions upon which the application of Pardon is suspended The immediate therefore Effect and Consequence of the Permutation which we are speaking of is only this that Christ by dying in our room had so far reconciled us to his Father as that he is willing to Pardon and admit us to his favour provided that we on our Parts perform the Conditions of the New Covenant Viz. Repentance and Faith For tho Christ by dying for us hath merited our Pardon yet it still continues so far in his own Power as that he will not dispose of it but upon such Terms as have been agreed upon between him and his Father which indeed are no other then such as without which we are neither capable of Pardon nor can God in Honour bestow it upon us To apply Pardon to a Sinner while he continues in his obstinacy and impenitence is not only contrary to the Holyness of God but inconsistent with his wisdom and destructive of his Authority and Government And therefore the Graces before mentioned must be looked upon by us to be both the necessary Parts of every Christians Duty and the indispensible conditions of his Happyness In another Letter I intend no more by an Exchange of Persons than what you have affirmed in your Writings As to your Second Query I Judge those Assertions and Acknowledgments frequently made by you in your Books concerning the sufferings of Christ and the satisfaction thereby made to the Justice of God for the Sins of Men do fully acquit you from giving any Countenance to the Errors of Socinus in that point In another Letter you have