Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
lord_n death_n eternal_a life_n 10,289 5 4.7511 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A66345 An end to discord wherein is demonstrated that no doctrinal controversy remains between the Presbyterian and Congregational ministers fit to justify longer divisions : with a true account of Socinianism as to the satisfaction of Christ / by Daniel Williams. Williams, Daniel, 1643?-1716. 1699 (1699) Wing W2647; ESTC R26372 65,210 134

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

of the Threatning of the Law Determ 12. When he calls Sin an occasion of Christ's Death he there calls it also a remote meritorious Cause Determ 5. And as for a proper meritorious Cause as when Children are punished for their Parents Sins Determ 5. His Safaction yielded to our most just Rector a sufficient ground on which to forgive penitent Believers spiritual and eternal Punishments Dis● 2. Nay he sees not supposing the Law of Works how God could forgive our Sins without the Penal Satisfaction of Christ Disp. 2. Determ 15. It were endless to produce the Instances demonstrating the Orthodoxness of this great Man as to the Satisfaction of Christ against Socinianism And by the way such as say Christ's penal Satisfaction was not necessary to the forgiveness of our Sins do a thousand times more favour Socinianism than Mr. Baxter's Notions or Words can be wrested to Perhaps others who follow Episcopius and some other Arminians when all must acquit him of Socinianism may surmise he favoureth their Notion of Christ's Death as if it were a Satisfaction only to the Will of God and not a full Satisfaction to the Iustice of God To this I answer Mr. B. distinguisheth Satisfaction into that which is the fulfilling the Will of a Person and that which is the Payment of what was owing by an Equivalent otherwise not due And he affirms that Christ's Satisfaction was not a mere fulfilling the Will of God tho it supposeth his Consent but it was a full Equivalent to what Punishments we deserved in that it better answered the Ends of Divine Government than the Sinner's Punishment would have done it more fully demonstrated the vindictive Justice of God than if the Sinner had been damned and it was a full Satisfaction to governing Justice and the End of the Law Vbi supra Determ 10 11 12 15. I thought this account necessary not only for the forementioned End but also that our Agreement in opposition to Socinianism might not exclude Mr. B. and such as approve of his Scheme which would add strength to that Heresy and be injurious to many worthy Persons nor ought a few words so fully explained be pressed to brand them with that odious Title who could more plausibly fix the same Character on Persons from things plainly asserted in the Socinian sense and subserving their Hypothesis As Christ's Death was not necessary to the remission of Sin the Promise of Forgiveness is no Effect of Christ's Death Repentance under the Gospel is an Effect of justifying Faith in Christ. The preaching of Reconciliation to Sinners is only to publish to them that God is already reconciled to them and to call them to be reconciled to God Many others might be instanced but I think it were unjust even upon such grounds to call any of these Socinians CHAP. VII An Enquiry into what Difference seems to remain concerning the Satisfaction of Christ and Iustification of a Sinner And this Difference reduced below any Cause of Discord I Think both sides are acquitted from all dangerous Errors concerning the Satisfaction of Christ and Justification of a Sinner nor can I doubt but the impartial Reader must apprehend the remaining Difference doth not lie in Opinions about these Doctrines themselves but in accommodating some words in opposition to other Errors which either Side have more especially applied their Minds to confute unless he should also ascribe it to a Zeal for sundry received Phrases on the one part and an apprehension in the other part that more accuracy is become needful since those Phrases were received 1. In both these Doctrines the visible Spring of what Difference remains is a different Notion of Christ's Suretiship For by this the word Imputation as used in both these Doctrines is governed viz. how our Sins were imputed to Christ when he satisfied and how Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us when we are justified both which depend upon the various Conceptions of the Suretiship of Christ and the manner of his representing us which I will begin with One Side thinks him a mediating Surety and distinguishing both as to the matter engaged and Instrument wherein he voluntarily engaged himself as also the respect he had to us therein 1. In the Covenant of Redemption they consider Christ agreeing with his Father the Terms of Satisfaction to Justice and Impetration of Life for Sinners and obliging himself to assume our Nature and therein perfectly to obey the Law die an accursed Death with whatever was equivalent to what by the Covenant of Works our Sins deserved Here they think Christ did not covenant strictly in our stead or as our Proxy tho he covenanted to die in our stead even strictly so He transacted as a free Interposer tho for our Salvation we were no federating Party tho we were the Persons whose Salvation was his promised Reward And therefore we have more reason since we are become his Members to say we intercede in Christ now than to say that we covenanted in Christ then Finally they account his Act of engaging so peculiar to himself that his non-performance of what he engaged which was impossible had not made us more guilty tho it would have left us miserable for our own Sins there being no other way to redeem us 2. They find Christ called a Surety in the Gospel-Covenant made with fallen Man Heb. 7. 22. and no where else This Covenant supposeth the former yea supposeth Christ's having executed his Engagements by the Covenant of Redemption to make Satisfaction to Justice i. e. it was at first accepted as if executed for this Covenant with Man doth not adjust the terms of Redemption but the way of conveying the Effects of that Redemption and is called the Testament of our Lord Jesus whereby he bequeaths the Blessings he acquired by his atoning Death In this Covenant Christ is such a Surety as not only assures us all will be performed which is promised to us on God's part but that undertakes to bring in the Elect and for the Perseverance of Believers unto eternal Life by his exerting that Power and Authority he hath received But here also they apprehend Christ a distinct federating Party A Mediator treating and obliging himself to make the Covenant stand sure and effect the Ends it was designed for but he binds not himself to believe repent or persevere for us but that we shall repent believe and persevere nor doth his Engagement that we should do so prevent our personal Engagement by Covenant to do it our selves tho in his Strength Now our Act of engaging is not his engaging Act but an Effect of it nor is our repenting his repenting Act but the Effect of his engaged Assistance nor is that Assistance of his reckoned to be legally our assisting our selves nor can we say that we covenanted in Christ to bring in the Elect or that Believers shall persevere By which with other Reasons we are induced to think that in covenanting he
Libertinism in Practice 3. As it hinders a well-grounded Assurance and encourageth Presumption 4. As it reproacheth Christ our blessed Redeemer Against each of which our Brethren bear their Testimony 1. The hurtful Antinomian Errors which render the Ministry unapt to its proper Ends are 1. Unduly limiting the Offers of Salvation and decrying Arguments to excite Sinners to use their Endeavours under the Assistance of Gospel Means and common Grace Against this see Error 10. and from p. 41 to 47. 2. Forbidding and branding as legal the preaching of Duties and Threatnings and the applying of promised Benefits as Motives to Faith and other Duties whereto those Benefits are promised Against which see Error 9. and p. 36 39. Error 6. and p. 25 26 45. 3. Denying that the Elect whilst unconverted are under the Curse of the Law and affirming they are united to Christ and justified before God and pardoned whilst impenitent Infidels Against which see Errors 1 2 11. and p. 12 to 18. and 47 58. 2. The hurtful Antinomian Errors tending to Libertinism in Practice besides the Impediments to a Sinner's Conviction and Conversion under the fore-mentioned Head of the Ministry are such as these 1. That God seeth no Sin in his People accounts them not their Sins but Christ's and is not displeased with his People nor afflicts them for their Sins Against which see Error 3. and p. 19. 2. That Repentance is not necessary to Forgiveness nor are Believers to mourn for Sin or to beg Pardon nor to confess it unless it be to shew for Christ's Glory how many the Sins are which are become his Against which see Error 4. and p. 19 20 21 47 58. 3. That their Sins can do Believers no hurt Against this see Error 5. p. 22 23. 4. That we ought not to intend our own Benefits by our Duties neither are bound to perform Duties unless excited thereto by the Spirit nor are any Acts of our Obedience rewardable and that continued Repentance and Holiness are not by the Constitution of the Gospel necessary to our being possessed of Eternal Life Against this see Errors 6 10 11. and p. 25 26 27 47 58 59. 5. That justifying Faith is a Perswasion that Christ is mine and that my Sins are pardoned in Christ. Against this see Error 8. and p. 30 31. 3. The hurtful Antinomian Error which hinders a well-grounded Assurance and Peace and also encourages Presumption is that besides the last description of Faith we are not to try our State by marks and signs of Sanctification Against this see Error 8. and p. 32 33 34. 4. The hurtful Antinomian Errors reproachful to Christ our Redeemer are such as these that Christ is as sinful as we and we are as righteous as Christ. Against which see Error 11. p. 48 57. If the Reader consult these places and compare them with our State of Truth and Error in the first Chapter he cannot but rejoice in our Brethrens Agreement with us in a Testimony against Antinomianism CHAP. V. SOCINIAN Errors concerning Christ's Satisfaction Also LIMBORG's with some other ARMINIANS concerning Christ's Satisfaction SOCINIAN Errors as to Justification LIMBORG's with some other Arminian Errors about Justification With a state of Truths opposite to each of these as also to Popish Errors FInding our Brethren suggest in the Preface to this Declaration that after all we have said in Cap. 1 and 2. yet still we ought to do more to discharge our selves from hurtful Errors about Christ's Satisfaction and our Iustification we shall to promote Peace renounce several more Errors about those two Doctrines wherein we are suspected and tell them what we think to be Truths Error 1. Punitive Justice against Sin is no Property of God but only an Effect of his Will and therefore there was no need of any Satisfaction to be made by Christ for Sin nor is it less than ridiculous to say God was at once just as well as merciful in bringing about our Salvation by Christ Socin opera Theol. Tom. 1. Praelect cap. 16. Tom. 2. de Servator par 1. cap. 1. Prael cap. 16. Wolzog. in Mat. 19. 28. Crel Resp. ad Grot. cap. 1. Truth God is essentially just and so zealous for the Honour of his Law when enacted and his Government that Sin must not go unpunished and therefore if Sinners be saved from the Punishments threatned by the violated Law for Christ their Mediator's sake it was necessary that he made Satisfaction to Punitive Justice by enduring the Penal Effects of God's Wrath. Error 2. Jesus Christ is not the true eternal most High God of the same Substance Authority and Power with the Father Socin Tom. 2. Respons ad Iac. Vujeki cap. 1 c. Truth Jesus Christ is the true eternal most High God of the same Substance Authority and Power with the Father and in time assumed the Human Nature and remaineth God-Man for ever more Note This Article is inserted because the Value of Christ's Obedience and Death for Satisfaction and Merit was deprived from the Dignity of Christ's Person as God And therefore tho the Socinians faintly argue that if Christ were the eternal God it would not render his Death a Satisfaction yet it 's evident their great Concern in denying Christ's Satisfaction is to prevent the unanswerable Argument this would be for his Deity The like is also to be seen by their Notion of the Lord's-Supper Error 3. Christ did not by his Blood acquire or purchase the Gospel-Covenant nor was his Death an impulsive Cause of God's promising to Men the Blessings of that Covenant nor did it move him to make such Promises But Christ was only the Mediator that is Sponsor of it who assured Men that God would accomplish it and who in God's Name and by his Command performed such things as belonged to the confirming and executing of the said Covenant Socin Tom. 2. 168 199. Crell Vol. 1. p. 612. and Vol. 3. Resp. ad Grot. p. 19 128 171. Vol. 1. 612. Truth Christ did not only confirm the Gospel-Covenant to Men and do such things as belonged to the execution of the Gospel Promises but God as Governor made those Promises in consideration of the Death of Christ as what vindicated the Glory of his Government in offering and promising such Blessings to condemned Sinners altho as our absolute Lord and Proprietor he freely purposed within himself that those Blessings should be granted in what method he judged fit Error 4. Christ was for no other cause a Mediator nor so call'd but that he was appointed by God a middle Person between himself and Men not that he should appease God towards Men but that he should declare God already pacified to them and most evidently confirm the same by himself And as for Men who were Haters of and Enemies to God them he was to reconcile to God i. e. convert and be our eternal Lawgiver and faithful Interpreter of the Divine Will to them by whom they might