Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	enter_v	heaven_n	pharisee_n	2,087	5	9.8405	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30249	Vindiciae legis, or, A vindication of the morall law and the covenants, from the errours of Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially, Antinomians in XXX lectures, preached at Laurence-Jury, London / by Anthony Burgess ...	Burgess, Anthony, d. 1664.	1647 (1647)	Wing B5667; ESTC R21441	264,433	303

of Christ were the same in kinde with the righteousness of works differing only gradually as an infant and a grown man for if so the Apostle would have said working and not beleeving It is a great skill in Divinity to amplifie this righteousness of faith without works so as neither the Papist or the Antinomian may incourage themselves thereby but of that in some other place As you take notice of the subject Beleever so the universality every one which doth take in both Jew and Gentile Therefore the Jew could not or ought not to think that those externall Rites and observations could bring them to a true righteousness Lastly consider in the Text for what end Christ is thus the perfection of the Law and that is for righteousness The proper seat of handling this is in the doctrine of Justification only let me briefly answer a Question made by some Whether the righteousness of faith or that we have by Christ be the same in nature with the righteousness of works and of the Law Stapleton saith They must needs be one because the Law will direct to no other righteousness then that of its own It it true the Law strictly taken will not properly and per se direct to any righteousness but that which the Law requireth yet by accident and indirectly it may yea as it was given by Moses it did directly and properly intend Christ though not primarily as some think but finding us unable to attain to its own righteousness did then lead us unto Christ Yet these two righteousnesses are divers rather then contrary unless in respect of justification and so indeed its impossible to be justified by both those waies otherwise they are both together in the same subject yea a righteousness of faith doth necessarily draw along with it in the same subject a righteousness of works though it be imperfect and so insufficient to justifie Use Is Christ the end of the Law for righteousness Then let the beleever bless and praise God for providing a righteousness and such a righteousness for him How destitute and naked was thy condition Had justice taken thee by the throat and bid thee pay what thou owest thou couldst not have returned that answer Let me alone and I will pay thee all Neither Angels nor men could provide this righteousness for thee Dost thou thank God for providing clothes for thy body food for thy belly an house for habitation Oh above all thanke him that he hath provided a righteousness for thy soul Thou troubled soul because of sin thou thinkest with thy selfe Oh if I had no sin if I were guilty of no corruption how well were it O ye glorious Angels and Saints ye are happy because ye have a righteousness Why doest thou not consider that God hath found out for thee even for thee in this world a righteousness whereby thou art accepted of him Again consider it is such a righteousness that satisfieth and pleaseth God Thy holiness cannot content him for justification but that of Christ can As the light of the Stars and Moon cannot dispell totally the darkness of the night only the light of the Sun can do that LECTVRE XXIX MAT 5. 17. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandements and shall teach men so shall be called the least in the Kingdome of heaven OUr Saviour being to vindicate the Law from all corrupt glosses of the Pharisees he doth in the first place as Chrysostome thinketh remove the odium that might be cast upon him as if he did indeed destroy the Law for it was then generally received that only was Law which the Pharisees declared to be so And this he doth ver 17. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law The reason he giveth is from the perpetuall nature of the Law heaven and earth the whole world shall sooner fall into pieces then any tittle of that And the Prophets are here joyned to the Law not so much in regard of their predictions as because they were Interpreters of the Law The second reason is from that evill which shall befall him that doth breake it and here he nameth a two-fold Antinomianisme one in life and practise the other in doctrine That in practise is aggravated though it be one of the least commandments They are called least either because the Pharisees thought them so or else indeed because all the commands of God were not concerning duties of the same consequence The other in doctrine is expressed in those words And teach men so I cannot consent to Beza's interpretation making this teaching to be by example and life or else 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although as if the meaning were He that doth break in his practice my commandment although he do teach them in doctrine There is no necessity of offering such violence to the Text. But if we interpret it of doctrinall breaking it will very well agree with the Pharisees who made void the commandements of God by the doctrines of men The evill that shall befall such is in those words He shall be called the least in the Kingdome of heaven Called is put for is or be He shall be the least By Kingdom of heaven some understand that Kingdome of glory in heaven and by least meane nullus none he shall not at all enter into the Kingdome of heaven Others by Kingdom of heaven do understand the Church of God and so they express it when there shall be a reformation in the Church and truth should break forth which was presently to come to pass then those corrupt teachers who would poyson men should be discovered and then they should be least that is of no account even as it fell out to the Pharisees though for a while they were highly esteemed among men I forbeare to touch upon that Question hotly disputed with some Whether our Saviour doe in this discourse meane only the Morall Law or the Ceremoniall also as being not to my purpose That it is meant cheifly of the Morall Law appeareth by the instances which Christ giveth From the Text thus opened I observe That any doctrine which teacheth tho abrogation or dissolution of the Law is highly offensive unto God For the opening of this consider that the doctrines of men may either directly and with an open face overthrow the Law as the Marcionites and Manichees did or else interpretatively and more covertly and that is done three waies 1. when they make not the Law of God to be so full and exensiue in it's obligation as indeed it is and thus the Pharisees they made void the Law when they affirmed outward acts to be only sins and thus the Papists do in part when they make the Law no further to oblige then it is possible for us to keep it These doctrines doe in tantum though not in totum destroy the Law 2. When men hold such principles that will