Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
scripture_n according_a church_n law_n 2,427 5 4.7566 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
A93282 The true church of Christ exposed to the view of all sober Christians, from the Word of God, sound reason, and the ancient fathers / by James Salgado, a Spaniard, a converted priest. Salgado, James, fl. 1680. 1681 (1681) Wing S384; ESTC R42935 23,389 69

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

speaking in his heart which is the Holy Spirit It 's in vain to reply hereunto that every one may pretend the Spirit for pretensions cannot prejudice the Truth the Question between us and the Papists is not Whether the Scriptures are of Divine Authority or not for both of us assert that they are But Whether he that admits this is perswaded of it To which whether they or we give the most satisfactory answer we leave the whole Christian World that are not partial to either Party to judge We conclude therefore that as this Question Whether the Scriptures are the Word of God is unworthy of a Christian So Jesuit Sambays's Assertion de fide Orthodoxa is foolish and ridiculous That the Protestants have not the Scriptures For besides that he defends it for no other end but that he may shun the dint of their Arguments drawn from the Scriptures He useth no other Medium to prove that Assertion but that the Reformed Church wanting the Marks of the true Church is a false Church and therefore cannot have the Scriptures which do both in their matter and form depend upon the Church Which Argument is most false and doth manifestly beg the Question viz. That the Scriptures and their sense depend upon the Authority of the Church which we utterly deny and that not without reason as I shewed above Moreover the Jesuit sheweth his Cause to be desperate by endeavouring to rob us of the Scriptures for none of the Ancient Fathers denied the Scriptures to any Heretick that argued his own Cause from them and Augustine that we quoted above affirms that the Scriptures are not peculiar to any one Party but impartial Judges of all We might with far better reason return this Argument upon the Papists because we have proved that their Representative Church is not only false but no Church at all But I am not so much afraid of their Arguments from Scripture and therefore do not deny them the Bible Having established the Opinion of the Reformed Churches in reference to the Authority of the Scriptures I shall now proceed to the properties of the same First therefore I affirm that the Scriptures are perfect by a perfection of parts as well as degrees and so sufficient to Salvation Psal 19. The Law of God is perfect Their sufficiency appears from the forecited place 2 Tim. 3.16 17. The accession of the New Testament to the Old doth not disprove the perfection and sufficiency of the Scriptures For he that revealed the whole Counsel of God to Believers did nevertheless reveal no other than what Moses and the Prophets had written before as we hinted above Hence the Ancient Fathers said very well As the New Testament is hid in the Old so the Old is made plain and clear in the New Nor doth a difference in degree alter the nature or species of a thing neither is the Question betwixt the Papists and us concerning this or that part of the Scriptures but concerning the whole Canon as it was received by the Ancient Church and enumerated by Hierom. So that in this Argument there is evidently the Fallacy of dividing what ought to be joyned together And as we justly cut off the Apocryphal Books from this perfection and sufficiency of the Scriptures because they contradict both themselves and the Canon nor were they ever received in the Jewish Church to which the Oracles of God were committed Rom. 3.2 So we reject the Popish distinction of Protocanonical Deuterocanonical Books with the same facility that they propose it being without proof Hence we do but little esteem unwritten Traditions because what is written doth sufficiently instruct us what we are to believe and do in order to life eternal John 20.31 It 's ridiculous to refer the several Orders of Monks and particularly the shaving of their Crowns to these unwritten Traditions because Christ says I have yet many things to say unto you but you cannot bear them now Joh. 16.12 For if this had been the thing that Christ had further to say unto them he might easily have sent for a Barber and caused their Heads to be shaved Besides that the Monks whose duty was to weep and not to teach saith Hierom were shaven as a sign of their penitence not of any honour or preeminence Secondly The Scriptures are plain and easie to be understood The Commandment enlightning the eyes Psal 19.8 Whatsoever things were written afore-time were written for our learning that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope Rom. 15.4 Those things therefore which are absolutely necessary to Salvation being very few and very easie are clearly and plainly set down in the Scriptures though other things not so absolutely necessary may puzle the most Sagacious understandings Chrysostom says well The holy Scriptures are such that a Lamb may wade in them and yet an Elephant may swim Seeing then that the Scriptures are plain as is evident from Reason and the Testimony of the Fathers the Reformed Churches do with good reason attribute a judgment of discretion in Controversies of Faith to every true Christian So that every Believer by frequent reading and comparing of the Scriptures may easily understand their meaning at least as to things absolutely necessary to Salvation For no Prophesie of Scripture is of a●y private interpretation nor came by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost 2 Pet. 1.20 21. As for the Fathers of the Ancient Church and the four Primitive Councils we willingly imbrace them as Interpreters of the Scriptures yea moreover we affirm that in subordination to the Scriptures they may bind but not force our belief But we utterly deny that the Fathers or these Councils or the Pope are Judges of Controversies about matters of Faith but the only Judge of all such Controversies is the Holy Ghost speaking in the Scriptures or as Augustine saith Christ himself Let Christ judge of this Controversie who although he be absent in his Person yet is present in his Word Hence it doth appear that the Scriptures may rightly be called a Normal Judge deciding the question in manner of a Law though not outwardly proclaiming the sentence The Word of God is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart Heb. 4.12 We have sufficiently proved that the Reformed Churches do vindicate the Authority and Properties of the Scriptures It remains now to be proved that they teach according to the Scriptures I shall pass the Doctrines of God and his Attributes of the Trinity and the like because there is little difference between the Papists and us in there Points except in some Preter-fundamental things which the Jesuits and Dominicans do also dispute among themselves I shall now only take notice of this that the Jesuits do very absurdly define Free-will viz. A Faculty whereby all things requisite to action being present the will may act or not act act this or the contrary For
besides that when the Object is present to the Understanding the Will is necessarily determined by the last practical judgment of the understanding to imbrace or reject the object like as if Straw and Fire come together there must needs a Flame be kindled I say besides this it 's impossible for any man to alter the Prescience and Decree of God which is one of the things requisite to action for the Counsel of God stands and he will do all his pleasure All things requisite to Judas his betraying of Christ being present viz. the last practical judgment of his understanding the receiving of the Money c. and the Eternal Counsel of God designing that Christ should be delivered into the hands of men suffer death and rise again the third day it was impossible for him not to act Therefore the Reformed Churches do excellently define Free-will A faculty of acting freely without compulsion or physical determination to one thing For the Will cannot be forced to any elicite or internal act nor is it capable of a physical or natural necessity determining it to one thing as Fire is determined to burn But it is not free from the determination of the Divine Decree and the last practical judgment of the understanding nor in the unregenerate from sin to which it is in general necessarily determined by its Original depravation although it hath a freedom to chuse this or that special sin So that in the unregenerate man it is free only to will nor can he by his own strength perform any action spiritually good Of our selves as of our selves we cannot think a good thought 2 Cor. 3.5 much less do a good action by nature We are dead in sin Eph. 2.1 without God in the world Eph. 2.3 and every imagination of our heart is only evil continually Gen. 6.5 And the best actions that the unregenerate can do are really evil because they do not proceed from Faith and whatsoever is not of Faith is sin Rom. 14.23 So that as from a total privation there is no returning to the habit but by an Infinite Power so from sin which is a privation of that rectitude which ought to be in our faculties and actions there is no returning to righteousness except God do quicken us from the Dead and say to us as unto Lazarus Lazarus arise Joh. 11.43 and cause the Sun of Righteousness to arise in the dark Horizon of our hearts saying as in the first Creation Let there be light Gen. 1. And truly seeing Regeneration according to Scripture phrase is a new Creation Create in me a clean heart Psa 51. We are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works Eph. 2.10 In Christ Jesus neither Circumcision availeth any thing nor Vncircumcision but the New Creature Gal. 6.15 it cannot be the work of less than an Infinite Power whereby God worketh in us both to will and to do of his good preasure Phil. 2.13 So that Augustine did rightly affirm that the good works of the Heathen were but glistering sins They may indeed act something that is morally good by the general influence of Divine Providence yet they can act nothingthat is truly good in a Theological sense because they want Faith to purifie their hearts nor do they aim at the glory of God for they do not shun this or that sin simply because it is a sin but from a vain-glorious desire of Reputation among the people Hence it followeth that Justification and Sanctification are not ours but Gods so that when God conferreth Glory upon those that are Justified and Sanctified he may with good reason be said to Crown with this reward his own gifts and not our works As for Justification of which we intend to speak first it is twofold active and passive for it may be considered either in respect of God that justifieth or of Man that is justified In the former consideration it is nothing else but an act of God whereby he absolves the sinner and reputes him righteous for the Merits and satisfaction of Christ Hence God is said to justifie the ungodly Rom. 4.5 by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ Rom. 3.24 So that God in justifying maketh no physical change in the sinner as the Papists say who would have the Justification of God to be of the same nature with Transubstantiation whereby one thing is changed into another that is that God in Justifying doth not proceed as a Judge pronouncing one at the Bar Innocent but as it were by a physical immutation making a righteous man out of an unrighteous even as Christ turned water into Wine Bellarmine Becan and other Jesuits have laboured much in the proof of this Assertion but without any success They produce nothing from Scripture but what is to be referred to Sanctification not Justification And thus they commit the fallacy of ignoratio Elenchi and as for their Arguments drawn from Reason they are so unreasonable that they do not deserve a Refutation Their chief Argument is taken from the Word it self for say they to Justifie according to the Etimology of the word is nothing else but to make just or righteous being it is compounded of justus and facio as well as to Sanctifie is to make not to pronounce holy c. Therefore to justifie cannot import the absolution of a sinner who is really unrighteous but the making of him righteous But they hereby shew themselves to be no better Gramarians than they are Divines for the sense of a word in matters of Faith is not to be taken out of Calepine but from the Word of God which is the Rule of our Faith Now it is manifest and hath been demonstrated by many that Justification is every where in the Scriptures taken in a Law-sense Thus Solomon He that justifieth the ungodly and condemneth the righteous are both an abomination unto the Lord. Here the justifying of the unrighteous is opposed to the condemning of the righteous and so in all other places of Scripture Moreover if this were the meaning of the word Justifie then there would be no difference between Justification and Sanctification which nevertheless is evident from Rev. 22.11 He that is righteous let him be righteous still and he that is holy let him be holy still Also Rom. 8.30 Whom he justified them he also glorified where under the word Glorifie is comprehended Sanctification which is begun Glory even as Glory is consummate Sanctification Lastly This Composition with the Verb Facio doth not always import an internal change as appears from the Song of the Blessed Virgin My Soul doth magnifie the Lord. Now let them set their heads together and prove that the Blessed Virgin by magnifying the Lord did cause any internal change in him and we shall also allow that God by justifying us doth make an internal change in us Ante leves vero pascentur in aethere cervi Hitherto of Active Justification Now we shall come to