Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	like_a	zeal_n	zealous_a	22	3	9.1889	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34977	Exceptions against a vvriting of Mr. R. Baxters in answer to some animadversions upon his aphorisms / by Mr. Chr. Cartwright ...	Cartwright, Christopher, 1602-1658.	1675 (1675)	Wing C691; ESTC R5677	149,052	185

appellantur saith Hierom speaking of Zachary Elizabeth Job c. non quod omni vitio careant sed quòd major● parte virtutum commendentur You grant that Holiness may be denominated from its congruency to the Precept as a Precept Now this you must grant may recipere magis minus for so you grant that Holiness may And if Congruency why not Conformity For Congruency and Conformity though divers words yet import for any thing I see one and the same thing I take Faith to be in part our Inherent Righteousness as it is Officium not as it is Conditio praecisè considerata 3. Whether Habitual Faith or Actual be properly the Condition of the Covenant is little to our purpose And for the thing it self as I shall grant that we must not content our selves with a habit of Faith but must also act Faith So I think you will not deny that we are Fideles and so justified even when we sleep though no act of Faith be performed by us You say nothing to that which I answered concerning our Divines of whom you spake viz. That they hold That the Righteousness whereby we are justified is not our Personal Righteousness and therefore though they say as you alledge That our Justification is perfect and therefore as you infer our Righteousness viz. whereby we are justified must be perfect also yet all this is little to your purpose 2. To what you say I have said enough before viz. That Faith which is the Condition of the New Covenant as to Justification is not our Righteousness whereby we are justified but only a means to partake of Christ's Satisfaction the only Righteousness by which we are justified And for being rei poenae Novae Legis for non-performance of its Condition I say still I know no punishment of the New Law for want of Faith as its Condition but only a leaving to the punishment of the Old Law which punishment yet I grant will be so much the more grievous as the sin which an Unbeliever both as an Unbeliever and otherwise is guilty of by Gospel-Aggravations is the more hainous 1. I as little doubt but that sincerity of Righteousness doth consist with imperfection of Righteousness viz. Inherent Righteousness which is really the same with Holiness how-ever in this or that respect we may distinguish the one from the other 2. How Hypocrisie can be taken for a seeming or appearing better than we are yet without affectation or dissimulation I do not understand If without any affectation or dissimulation of ours we seem better than we are it is another's errour not our fault neither can we therefore be called Hypocrites Your manifold distinctions of Sincerity do serve rather to confound the Reader than to unfold the matter I take sincerity to be no distinct Grace but the Modus of other Graces but why that Modus may not admit of degrees I confess I do not see I conceive Zeal to be of like nature yet one may be more or less zealous and so also more or less sincere You say here There is no Medium inter Ens non Ens of which I make no doubt but pag. 2. you think Relations to be inter Ens Nihil and what difference between Nihil non Ens You say That you have over and over shewed That Conformity to the Rule of the Condition doth consist in indivisibili Indeed you have divers times affirmed That all Conformity is of that nature but I could never yet see it proved But why do you now speak of Conformity to the Rule of the Condition I take Conformity to the Rule of the Precept to be our Personal Righteousness and the Sincerity of that Conformity to be the Sincerity of this Righteousness And this Righteousness though it be sincere I hold to be imperfect because the Conformity to the Rule is imperfect Sincerity saith Master Blake is said to be the New Rule or the Rule of the New Covenant But this is no Rule but our Duty taking the Abstract for the Concrete Sincerity for sincere walking and this according to the Rule of the Law not to reach it but in all parts to aim at it and have respect unto it Then shall I not be ashamed when I have respect to all thy Commandments Psal 119. 6. And this is our Inherent Righteousness which in reference to its Rule N. B. labours under many imperfections And a little before he saith thus I know no other Rule but the Old Rule the Rule of the Moral Law that is with me a Rule a perfect Rule the only Rule 3. It seems very incongruous to grant that Apoc. 22. 11. Be holy still doth import an encrease of Holiness and yet to deny that Be righteous still doth import an increase of Righteousness For any thing I know some on the contrary may as well say That the latter words import an increase of Righteousness and yet the other no increase of Holiness Whereas you speak of varying the sense according to the variety of Subjects you take it for granted That here the Subjects are various whereas both by this and divers other places before cited it seems clear to me that the Subjects viz. Righteousness and Holiness are really the same one with the other For the Formale of Righteousness what is it but Conformity to the Law the only Rule of Righteousness And why such Conformity may not be more or less I am yet to learn That place indeed as many other speaks of a true Personal Righteousness in the Saints but yet not of a Perfect Righteousness in them and consequently not of such a Righteousness as whereby they are justified except it be only in some sort and in some measure which is not the Justification about which we contend This Imperfect Righteousness is measured by the Law of Works as a Rule though it be accepted only by the gracious condescension of the Gospel To Ephes 4. 24. you give many Answers but they seem but so many Evasions 1. I think there is no Question but the Apostle speaks by way of Precept and Exhortation q. d. If you have indeed learned Christ and have been taught by him you have learned to do so and so therefore have a care to do so Surely the Apostles words import a duty required and so implicity contain a Precept or Exhortation 2. That he speaks as well to Believers True Believers as mere Professors is as little to be doubted For he speaks unto them upon a supposition that they had learned Christ and had been taught by him which though it may belong to mere Professors yet to true Believers much rather 3. If the New Man which is created in Righteousness and Holiness may encrease as you grant then surely Righteousness and Holiness in which the New Man is created and without which the New Man is nothing must increase also To say That the New Man may increase in Holiness but not in