Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	act_n	faith_n	justify_v	2,616	5	9.2467	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A87010	A brief vindication of three passages in the Practical catechisme, from the censures affixt on them by the ministers of London, in a book entitled, A testimony to the truth of Jesus Christ, &c. / By H. Hammond D.D.	Hammond, Henry, 1605-1660.	1648 (1648)	Wing H518; Thomason E424_9; ESTC R202516	8,057	16

justified and by them we are justified and 〈◊〉 by faith only Therefore faithful actions or acts of ●●●th are not by St. James excluded or separated from Faith or the condition of our justification but required together with faith as the only things by which as by a condition the man is justified The first proposition is clear from the nature of a condition the second from the words cited out of S. James and then I hope the conclusion will neither be error nor pernitious Then for S. Paul 't is made evident in the Pract Catech●sme that the faith by which according to his doctrine Abraham was justified and not by works Rom. 4. was not only a depending on God for the performance of his promise which yet was a faithful action or act of Faith but also a resigning himself up wholly to him to obey his precepts or more clearly was a Faith which howsoever it was tried by promises or commands did answer God in Acts of faith or faithful actions and so was accepted by God without absolute unsinning obedience much more without obedience to the Mosaical law i. e. without works all which is clear in the story of Abraham and I suppose need not farther be evidenced And then concerning S. Pauls part in the businesse my syllogisme shall be this He that affirms Abraham to be justified by that Faith which howsoever 't was tried did answer God in acts of faith or faithful actions doth not exclude or separate Faithful actions or acts of faith from faith or the condition of our justification but absolutely requires them c. But S. Paul affirms Abraham to be justified by that Faith which howsoever 't was tried did answer God in faithful actions or acts of faith Therefore S. Paul doth not exclude or separate faithful actions c. The first proposition I conceive wants little proving after that which hath been already premis'd in this matter And for the second I shall desire that Abrahams faith as it hath justification attributed to it by Saint Paul may be viewed both in the 4 to the Rom. and the 11 to the Heb. In the former his faith was tried by the promise of a numerous seed c. and he answered that with one act of faith or faithful action believed in hope beyond hope v. 18. was strong in Faith and gave glory to God v. 20. was fully perswaded that what God had promised he was able to perform v. 21. all which what are they but acts of faith or faithful actions all which when the object of the faith is Gods absolute promise the matter is capable of and for this it was counted to him for righteousnesse or he was justified ver. 22. and thence sure I may conclude that these were so required as the condition by which he was and without which he should not be justified In the 11 to the Heb. many other acts of his faith or faithful actions are mentioned v. 8. by faith he obeyed to go out of his own Country not knowing whither he went and v. 9. by faith he sojourn'd in a strange land v. 10. by faith he expected a city that hath foundations v. 17. by faith he offer'd his Son and v. 19. counted that God was able to raise him up from the dead v. 20. by faith he blessed Isaac concerning things to come What are all these but acts of faith or faithful actions in all kinds of tryals And therefore I suppose all this being out of Saint Paul as the former out of Saint James 't will be no error or pernitious from their very words to have affirm'd this doctrine and affixt it on them I suppose also this may serve for the second proposition The third is set down p. 18. from Pract. Catech. p. 120. and t is this That thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain is undoubtedly no more then thou shalt not forswear thy self To this Charge I answer first that it is a little strange that a bare explication of a phrase of Scripture a part of the third Commandement in Exod. though it were acknowledged false or forc'd should yet be so far improvable by any as to come under the title of an infamous pernicious error a spawn of the old accursed heresies c. and be capable of all those other aggravations at first mention'd which being affixt to all the errors in the Catalogue must also be affixt to this which is set down for one of them But then secondly for the truth most undoubted certain truth of this explication or interpretation thus censured I have formerly at large made it appear that the words to take the name of God signifie to swear and no more and the Hebrew which we render in vain signifies falsly and is so rendred in the ninth Commandement and agreeable to that Psal. 15. to lift up the soul to vanity is to swear by the soul or life falsly as it there follows nor sworn to deceive his neighbour and beside my own judgement in this matter back'd with the consent of as learned as this age hath or the Antient Church had any I conceiv'd that I had a most authentick warrant from Christ himself who renders it {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} thou shalt not forswear thy self For so we read Mat. 5. ye have heard that it was said to them of old thou shalt not kill and again in the same manner thou shalt not commit adultery that is That of the 10 Commandements delivered in Sinai and brought down by Scripture to them his present auditors one Commandement was thou shalt not kill another thou shalt not commit adultery and so again in the very same form of words another Thou shalt not forswear thy self From which I did assure my self and so stil do that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is as directly the interpretation in Christs judgment of the first part of the third Commandement as {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} of the seventh and sixth and so that it is undoubtedly no more the one then the other And indeed this was the only occasion of delivering those words in the Pract Catech. to shew that Christ did not misreport the words of the Commandements nor yet refer to any other place but that Commandment in those words of his And though I have many other things that I could say to that matter able to free that speech from all imaginable inconveniences especially when in that place Christs prohibition is explain'd to be against all kind of swearing by any other as wel as by God in ordinary conversation or in any case but wherein it is necessary to confirm by oath yet I am very willing to leave the matter here upon this account at this time given of it i. e. in my opinion on Christs score and not fear what any ingenuous Reader wil charge on me for this interpretation I beseech God to forgive them which have brought this unnecessary trouble upon the Reader and for my self I have to them these two only requests 1. That they wil examine themselves sincerely and as in Gods sight what the motive or design was which perswaded them to single out me alone who professe my self and am by all that know me acknowledg'd to hold nothing contrary to the Church of England and wil justifie it to any man that knows what the Church of England is and joyn me with the broachers of all the blasphemies and heresies of this age And 2ly that they wil lay to heart the consequences which may naturally flow from hence if God do not uphold weak Christians who seeing so many doctrines of very distant natures blended together with the same brand of heresie and blasphemy infamous and pernicious fasten'd on them and no kind of proofs annext that any are such beside the judgment of the Censors may possibly find some of them to be the infallible truths of God and be tempted if they have not stronger antidotes then this bare Testimony wil afford them to have the same thoughts of the other also Or if not whether they wil not be inclined to have the same severity and condemnation for me or any other asserter of such propositions as these as they are taught to have for the authors of those other blasphemous propositions and so be tempted to uncharitablenesse Having said thus much I shall hope it may find some good successe among some who have subscribed that Testimony But if I am mistaken in all of them I shall then desire that this improsperous Paper may gain me but thus much that either the first subscriber Mr John Downam who did License the Printing of this very Book from whence all these pretended Errors are cited or else Dr Gouge or Mr Gataker who are foremost of the second rank or some other person of learning and Christian temper wil afford me their patience personally and by fair Discourse or any other Christian way to debate the truth of our pretensions and for this I shal wait their leisure H. HAMMOND From my Study Christ-Ch in Oxon. Jan. 24. Munday The End