Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	die_v	sin_n	sin_v	13,883	5	9.2456	4	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A09695	A learned and profitable treatise of mans iustification Two bookes. Opposed to the sophismes of Robert Bellarmine, Iesuite. By Iohn Piscator, professor of diuinitie in the famous schools of Nassouia Sigena.; Learned and profitable treatise of mans justification.	Piscator, Johannes, 1546-1625.	1599 (1599)	STC 19963; ESTC S102907	52,379	138

that place to the Corinthes thus Wee haue borne the true Image of the earthly man that is of the sinner Adam because sinne cleaued in vs not putatiuely but in truth and in deed Therefore we beare also Christs true Image if iustice cleaue in vs not putatiuely but in truth and in deed Here Bellarmine deceitfully in stead of the word Imputation putteth as equall thereto the word Putation saying putatiuely for imputatiuely that he might note a certaine vaine opinion whereunto no matter subsisteth Yet in the meane while Bellarmine is not ignorant that not onely the sinne which dwelleth in man since the fall is deriued from Adam vnto his posteritie by generation but also that first sinne committed properly by Adam is imputed to his posteritie And by like reason not onely inherent iustice that is study of godlinesse in those that belong vnto Christ is wrought by Christ through regeneration of the holy Ghost but also that obedience of Christ whereby he satisfied for the sinnes of the elect is imputed vnto theÌ„ for the iustice whereby they stand before God Moreouer he concludeth not heere the question which is not whether wee shall beare Christes Image as touching inherent iustice for no professor of the Gospell denieth this but the question is whether by this iustice we can stand in the iudgement of God The 7. argument hee draweth from Rom. 6. where the Apostle teacheth saith he that we through Iustification 7. Argument whereby we die to sinne and rise againe to iustice do represent Christs death and resurrection And amongst other things saith He that is dead is iustified from sinne Which also the Apostle Peter signified in his first Epistle Chap. 4. when he saith Christ therefore hauing suffered in the flesh be ye also armed with the same minde For he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sinnes But Christ was not putatiuely but truly dead truly rose again therefore we also do not putatiuely but truly die to sinne and rise againe to iustice when wee are iustified by Baptisme I answere First it is false that the Apostle in Rom. 6. teacheth that wee by Iustification do represent Christs death and resurrection For hee treateth not there of Iustification hauing made an end of that dispute in in the 5. Chapter but he treateth of sanctification or regeneration Neither can it bee proued otherwise from those words He that is dead is iustified from sinne For the Apostle speaketh not there of mans Iustification before God but vseth the word Iustified for Freed by a synechdoche of the species For euery one that is iustified that is to say is quitted by the Iudge is freed to wit from punishment but euery one that is freed is not iustified for one may be freed from some other thing then from punishment as from sinne And of this freeing saith the Apostle He that is dead is iustified from sinne for because hee that is dead cannot worke eyther good or euill Therefore beleeuen in as much as they are dead to sinne as the Apostle there saith verse 11. so far forth they are freed from sinne Euen as a seruaÌ„t by death is freed from his maister that he serue him not any more hereafter as the Apostle saith in the words immediately going before That our old man is crucified with Christ that the body of sinne may be weakened that hereafter we serue so no more Then it is true that wee do truly die to sinne and rise againe to iustice but the question is not of this thing but it is whether by this spirituall death and resurrection that is to say inherent iustice we be iustified before God Finally Bellarmine comprehendeth more in the conclusion then followeth of the premisses where he saith When we are iustified by faith in which very thing hee beggeth the question For the Apostle sayth not in the place cited that we are iustified by Baptisme seeing hee handleth nothing there of Iustification but teacheth that Baptisme is a testimonie of our regeneration which is wrought by the holy Ghost in as much as it teacheth vs of Christs death and resurrection For it being taught by the holy Ghost we beleeue that Christ died for our sinnes and rose againe vnto heauenly life as our first fruites and head certainly wee will study to auoyde sinnes and will meditate an heauenlie and an holie life The 8. Argument hee taketh from Rom. 8. where the Apostle saith Bellarmine writeth 7. Argument That wee now by Christ haue receiued the spirit of adoption of sonnes of God as touching the soule which liueth as there is said because of Iustification though the body be dead that is be yet mortall because of sinne But by and by after hee addeth to wit the Apostle that we now hauing the first fruites of the spirit doo sigh in our selues expecting the adoption of the sonnes of God the redemption of our body For as the same Apostle saith Phil. 3. Wee expect a Sauiour which will reforme the body of our humilitie configured to the body of his glory But the adoption of sonnes which we expect in the redemption of our body shall be most true and inherent in the body that is immortalitie and impassibilitie not imputatiue but true Therefore the adoption which now we haue in the spirit by Iustification ought also to be true not putatiue Otherwise as we expect the redemption of the body so also we expect the redemption of the soule I answere First Bellarmine faulteth in a false exposition in as much as he taketh the name body simplie for the body of man and contrariwise the name spirit for the soule For the Apostle there by the name body vnderstandeth that which in that and other places hee calleth flesh that is the body together with the soule but such as it is by carnall generation and likewise by the name spirit he vnderstandeth the soule with the body but so far forth as the soule is regenerate by the holy Ghost Next he faulteth in false citation for the Apostle writeth not The soule liueth because of Iustification but The spirit is life because of Iustice Then againe he faulteth in false exposition in as much as he expouÌ„deth those words The body is dead to meane Is yet mortall when the Apotles meaning is that by the holy Ghost dwelling in the beleeuers it commeth to passe that their flesh is mortified as touching sinne to wit so as that it sinne not and the spirite is quickned as concerning iustice to wit so as that it endeuoureth for iustice and worketh it That this is the meaning of those words may plainly appeare to any that marketh by the words there next ensuing Moreouer Bellarmines sophisme from a like reason of the adoption of the body and the adoption of the soule is vtterly darke and farre from the Apostles words and meaning For neither doth the Apostle say the adoption to come in the body nor yet that wee now haue adoption in the

vnto that effect of AbrahaÌ„s faith to wit glorifying of God as vnto the truth of his faith which truth is signified by that effect For in applying Abrahams example hee doth not now mention strong faith such as that of AbrahaÌ„s was but simply true faith to wit wherby we beleeue that God gaue Iesus for our sinnes and raised him vp for our Iustification The place Rom. 10 speaketh not of Iustification but of saluation that is glorification Which although it be obtained by inuocation proceeding of faith yet is it not obtained by the merit of faith but by Gods grace and the way that he hath prescribed Lastly although out of Hebr. 11. it is manifest that faith is of great price with God yet hence it followeth not that wee by faith do merit Gods benefits For as other the benefites of God so faith it selfe also is Gods free gift as the Apostle witnesseth Eph. 2.8 The 5. prin cipal argumeÌ„t which hath 2. branches There remaineth the last argument which Bellarmine saith is taken from two principles of which the one is that the formal cause of Iustification is Iustice really inherent in vs the other that good works are necessarie to saluation Before wee see how Bellarmine dooth reason froÌ„ these principles it is meet first to put in minde that that first principle is false euen by Bellarmines owne testimonie 2. Booke of IustificatioÌ„ Chapt. 2. For else-where he saith The formall cause of Iustification consisteth in the infusion of that inherent iustice But infusion of Iustice is not the inherent iustice it selfe But now let vs see how he reasoneth from these principles FroÌ„ the first principle he reasoneth thus Vnto the infusion of iustice are more actions required then the action of faith But Iustification is the infusion of iustice Therfore vnto Iustification are required moe actions then the action of faith And by consequence onely faith Iustifieth not after the manner of disposition I answere First Bellarmine here departeth froÌ„ the question not oppugning the opinion of the professors of the Gospell but a Popish fiction For the professors of the Gospel when they say that faith onely iustifieth do not meane that it iustifieth onely by way of disposition but by way of apprehension as hath already bâ—â— often declared Then the assumption is false as we haue shewed before Besides Bellarmine agreeth not with himself who now affirmeth that the action of faith is fore-required vnto Iustification also that it disposeth vnto IustificatioÌ„ wheÌ„ before he said 1 Booke of IustificatioÌ„ Chap. 13.2 Booke Chapt. 4. Of grace and free-will 1. Booke Chap. 6. The latter Branch that Faith iustifieth as the beginning and first roote of Iustification and afterward he maketh faith part of the formall cause of Iustification where he saith That faith is not the whole formal cause of Iustification And in an other place that the formall cause of Iustification consisteth in faith hope and charnie Is part of the forme therefore fore required for the obtaining of the forme Now froÌ„ the other principle he draweth this argument If faith only did iustifie it shuld only saue also But it doth not only saue because good works are also necessarie to saluation Therefore it onely doth not Iustifie I answere Although this argument at the first sight haue a great shew yet if it be throghly looked into it will be sound to be a * i. A false argument Paralogisme hauing foure terms by the homonyâ—â—â—â— or double signification of the argument or middle cerme For that Onely saue in the proposition is to be vnderstood specially of saluation which is by way of apprehension but in the assumption it is vnderstood generally of saluation which is any maner of way For faith onely saueth as the instrumentall apprehending cause to wit by apprehending Christes satisfaction for which God saueth the beleeuer but it doth not onely saue euery maner of way for Gods grace and Christs satisfaction also saueth but as the principall efficient causes also good workes saue but as the way by which God bringeth the beleeuers vnto saluation This double signification being obserued I answere to the assumption where it is said Faith saueth not onely If this be vnderstood generally it is true but then an other thing is assumed then was in the proposition For wheÌ„ it is said in the proposition Faith onely saueth that is not vnderstood generally but specially to wit by way of apprehension But if the assumption bee vnderstood specially as in the proposition namely that faith onely saueth not by laying hold on Christs satisfaction it is manifestly false CHAP. IIII. The proofe of the third part recited and refuted HItherto of the second part of the Papists sentence wherein they contend that faith onely iustifieth not Now followeth the third part wherein they dispute that Iustification standeth not onely in forgiuenesse of sins Which Bellarmine purposeth to proue thus I Booke of IustificatioÌ„ Chap. 6. Iustification consisteth also saith he in inward renuing Therefore not in forgiuenesse of sinnes onely Wee denie the antecedent But to proue that Bellarmine bringeth some places of scripture which wee will consider in order The first place is Rom. 4. Who was deliuered for our sinnes and rose againe for our iustification That is as Bellarmine interpreteth that we may walke in newnesse of life I answer This exposition of Bellarmines is false coÌ„fouÌ„ding those things which the Apostle distinguisheth For Paul beginneth in that Epistle to dispute of renning of nature or of sanctification at the sixt chapter hauing finished the disputation of iustification in the fift chapter And the sense of the place alleaged is That Christ was deliuered vnto death for our sinnes that is to purge our sinnes by satisfaction and was raised vp for our iustification that is to say that he might make knowen our iustification to wit that he hath obtained it by his death for vs. For if he had not risen from the dead we should yet be in our sinnes 1. Cor. 15. Wherefore seeing he is risen againe we know that we are no more in our sinnes but that forgiuenesse of sinnes or our iustification is gotten for vs by Christs death The second place is The 2. place Rom. 5. As sinne reigned vnto death so also grace reigneth by iustice vnto eternall life FroÌ„ hence Bellarmine reasoneth thus He opposeth iustice to sin and by iustice vnderstandeth renuing from which works proceed of life for that the opposition requireth For sinne is said to haue reigned vnto death because it wrought deadly workes contrariwise therfore the grace of God is said to reign by iustice vnto life because by iustice infused it worketh the works of life And if inward renuing which is the beginning of good works be rightly called rustice out of doubt Iustification must be constituted in that renuing and not in forgiuenesse of sinnes onely I answere A gaine Bellarmine bringeth a false exposition For the Apostle entreateth nothing

Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Text snippets containing the quad