Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	according_a	law_n	lord_n	3,386	5	3.9125	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45142	The middle-way in one paper of the covenants, law and gospel : with indifferency between the legalist & antinomian / by J.H.	Humfrey, John, 1621-1719.	1674 (1674)	Wing H3693; ESTC R16428	27,351	35

I will confess though in my judgment I am perswaded that what I have writ is the truth and it is nothing but truth that made me write it yet does my heart a little misgive me that it were better to let pious men alone to such apprehensions as they have imbibed though mingled with much darkness and some errour in such a point as this where so much of their peace and life is bound up then to offer them any unsettlement by cleerer light though I were able indeed to bring it to them I may be allowed to be sorry if I offend any body but I ought to have a care I stumble none who are good men and live godly Neither would I streighten my own soul If there be any thing more therefore in the imputation of Christs righteousness then I have expressed in that paper which I know not I doe not part with my portion in it I protest thus much but will rather renounce all upon the conviction to cleave to it That Christs righteousness does justify us from the Law and so from sin and from condemnation I do hold no less then others but that Christs righteousness does justify us by the Law is an overgrown conception It is certain that no works of man be we never so holy are able to stand before God in his disstrict judgment that is if he should deal with us according to the exact justice of the Law without shewing us any mercy which will be acknowledged by Protestants and Papists who are ready to pray both with David Enter not into judgment with thy servants O Lord for in thy sight shall no flesh living be justified If any Papist then shall think that mans righteousness is made so perfect by Christs merits or any Protestant that Christs righteousness it self is so made ours as that we are justified by the Law upon that account they are both mistaken This is the only true extreamity on both sides for it is not by the Law but by Faith by the Evangelical covenant or by Grace that we are justified We are not under the Law sayes the the Apostle but under grace It is enough for a poor sinner to have a righteousness imputed to him without works and that he is pardoned but to have a righteonsness imputed to him with works is more then we can sind to be allowed him Christs righteousness is such and to have that made ours in it self or so as that in Gods reckoning we must be as righteous as he I must needs say it is not harder perhaps to believe that the bread is turned into Christs body where we have a text for it in the Sacrament then to believe such a conceit for which we have no Scripture at all in the matter of Justification What then Do I deny Imputation No but I explain it It is by the righteousness of Christ not inherent in us our Divines will say Ordinarily but imputed to us that we are justified And what if I thus interpret this for them that is not as if we had done in his person what Christ did but by his righteousness made ours in the effects only So the very Learned Bishop Forbs expresly Hoc est Quoad effectum fructum See Considerationes modestae De justificatione l. 2. c. 2. I will use the same words as they use but I am not bound to the same construction Even as I will speak of mans insufficiency I mentioned before as other Divines do and as the Scriptures do that we can do nothing but I will keep the due interpretation I will say we can and that we cannot without loss of my liberty for I must understand it with its right measures I will say I can in confession of my sin and acknowledging God just I will say I cannot in the sense of my corruption and the imploring his grace Indeed a man can hardly consider the Doctrin of St. James never so little with that of Paul which is one part of my paper but it will lead him to the other which is to see that what our Protestants say ordinarily on this matter does need a favourable exposition It is a jejune thing I count to bring the great dispute that Paul hath with the Jewes about justification to this result only whether we are justified by Faith or the proper Work or Fruits of it It is but a little more satisfactory to bring it only to this whether it be by the observation of Moses Law For though this was the occasion of the dispute and the Apostle therefore does shew them how it was by the Promise and so by Faith that Abraham and the Jewes themselves had life and not by the Law which was but a Schoolmaster to lead them thereunto or unto Christ yet it is manifest that he advances the point higher while he tells them that by Works neither Jew nor Gemile could be justified so that by works he must mean the observation of that Law of works which was common to both and not Moses Law only and the resolution of the dispute in both Apostles comes to this as I have said that it is by the performance of the covenant of Grace and not of the ovenant of works or Law of Moses that a man is to look for life everlasting I must add Nor are they to be heard in a third place who say that the dispute between Paul and the Jewes is neither of these but whether we are justified by our own righteousness or by the righteousness of Christ and so resolve that it is not by any works which we do even Faith it self as a work but by the works Christ hath done for us that is by the obedience of his life and death only For though this be taught ordinarily by our Protestants and is coincident with the first result there is one thing I must say these Divines have not considered which I have offered them in my paper that must bring them to another understanding It is this that the Apostle does indeed stand much upon the Righteousness of God in opposition to works in the business of justification but never opposes our works to the Righteousness of Christ the Righteousness of Christ in their sense being truly a very contrary thing to the Righteousness of God in the sense of the Apostle The righteousness of God according to the A ostle if I may then describe it but as well as I can and as the thing is and a little more fully then I have in my former paper is on Gods part his taking our human frailey or falne nature into that meet consideration as not to deale with us in his district judgment which we cannot beare but according to his Covenant of Mercy the righteousness sacrifice attonement or satisfaction of Christ being supposed as the foundation upon which his Justice does stand good notwithstanding this condescention And consequently on Mans part this righteousness is our imperfect duty performed in sincerity