Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	apostle_n	church_n	creed_n	2,605	5	10.2206	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34980	Christ exalted and Dr. Crisp vindicated in several points called antinomian, being cleared from neonomian suggestions alledged, by some remarks on Mr. A-, his rebuke to Mr. Lob shewing from Scripture and most orthodox authors the invalidity of his rebuke in taxing the doctor to be apocryphal, and his doctrine antinomian : with some observations on the Bishop of Worcester's letter concerning the great point of the change of persons between Christ and believers ... : with a table to find the heads insisted on / done by a happy, tho' unworthy branch of the said doctor.	Crisp, Samuel, 1669 or 70-1704.	1698 (1698)	Wing C6917; ESTC R24787	120,659	146

Exchange of Person for Person which is the surest Exchange in War or Captivity when nothing but one Person will be taken in the room of another §. LXXIV One would wonder how it should happen that my Dear Kratiste and his Friends should be ignorant of such Passages as these so as he should speak as if this Term was never dream'd of before when the Great Luther is so precise in the Term and other Excellent Men. Therefore I beseech you be not too confident of your grasping all Things in all Councils Synods and Assemblies lest you lose all O how much better is it to say with the Apostle He that thinketh he knoweth any thing knoweth nothing as he ought to know it and with Agur I have not the Vnderstanding of a Man than to Challenge all the World with what is said in all Councils General and Provincial The humble he will teach and the mock he will g●●●● in Judgment Which the Lord grant to us all and that we may be ever learning of our Blessed Lord and Master to be meek and lowly §. LXXV My Dear Kratiste goes farther in Bontering the Phrases of Christ's taking our Person and we his Person and spares not to call them Apocryphal Phrases though they are such as many Holy Men have made use of to clear up the great and comfortable Doctrine of Christ's being our Surety and making Satisfaction for us Well may he call Tobias Apocryphal if he calls his great Teacher under Christ the Apostle Paul Apocryphal as I shall shew by and by He is pleased to come forth in great State in Page 49 as my Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer with his Quo Warranto against the Commutation of Persons and thus Harangues the World Quo Warranto Why must all the World be Hereticated that dare not subscribe to these Apocryphal Phrases which neither Scripture nor Antient Fathers nor General nor Particular Councils nor Synods nor Assemblies nor single Churches ever brought into their Creeds c. What a scampering flourish is here over all Councils Fathers c. circuating the Universe as if our Author were the Magazine of all Learning and had fortified himself on every side against this Change of Persons and Christ's sustaining our Person as if the Phrase were intollerably uncooth I shall only attack one Fort which is the first Out-Fort the Scripture and if that be taken he must yield all the rest The Scripture is the Pillar and Ground of Truth We will see if that doth not bring into our Creed this Term of Christ's bearing our Person and we his Person or that which is plainly tantamount doth not the Apostle say Col. 2.6 7. As ye have received the Lord Jesus Christ so walk in him Rooted and built up in him What is this but to be in his Person by Faith joined to the Lord and so he coming one Spirit as the Apostle saith which is the same as to be one Person But as if God would at once by one stroke quell all the Quarrels and Exceptions against the Truth and calling it unintelligible Nonsense as in Truth it is to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philosophers he condescends to the very Term of our being in the person of Christ and saith in 2 Cor. 2.10 by the Apostle Paul If I forgave any thing for your sakes forgave I it in the Person of Christ What thinks my Dear Kratiste now Is this Term so novel as never to be brought into our Creed by Scripture Councils or Fathers O how good is it to be humble and not to tower to the top of all Learning denying this phrase to be in Scripture Fathers or Councils when at the very threshold we see one may fall For here the very express Scripture uses the phrase of the Apostles being in the Person of Christ and forgiving an offending Brother in the Person of Christ And so I hope we shall all learn to forgive one another and not to rebuke with immoderate strains as our Rebuker hath very unwarrantably done in charging the Doctor with wild monstrous Sense and Apocryphal Phrases when he speaks the Apostle Paul's Language §. LXXVI I hope you will allow the Apostle to bring this Term of our sustaining Christ's person into our Credenda or Things to be believed though the Doctor whom for it you charge with Antinomian Heresie may not use the word without a severe Lash Is this to learn of our Lord Jesus who would excuse his Disciples under failings and not presently bring them to the block much less would he tax them with a wild monstrous Sense of Things when they spake only the Sense of the Scriptures But why this Expression should be Heresie in the Doctor though Orthodox in the Apostle I can quickly tell It being I reckon from his having some Mens persons in admiration Our Kratiste having some time since prest hard on the Conscience of Mr. Williams he is now raising up his Reputation which he might suppose this a proper way for by loading the Doctor with the Title of a Dreggy Apocryphal Heretick because Mr. Williams had written so much against him in his Gospel-Truth stated and so the Rebuker here seconding Mr. Williams in aspersing the Doctor would redintegrate the said Mr. Williams into the good esteem of those who had occasion given them for low Thoughts of him upon account of what the Rebuker had reflected on Now to make him amends if Mr. Williams hath criminated the Doctor the Rebuker must do so also or how can Mr. Williams stand Rectus in Curia or in statu quo with those who had taken some Offence at those Things he was charged with So that Things being thus Mr. Williams being to be redintegrated into publick applause now if Mr. Williams say I deny a Change Kratiste can do no less than say The term of a Change is novel and unintelligible If Mr. Williams say This is Dr. Crisp ' s Error or Mistake Kratiste will exemplifie enlarge and perfect the Crimination and call it Heresie Which how Christian like it is or the contrary I hope the Lord will one day convince him §. LXXVII In Page 51 he offers us a moot Point worthy to be taken notice of thus I would propound a moot Point whether the Socinians who have blasphemously degraded the Person of Christ into a God by Office though a meer Man by Nature or the Antinomians who own him to be a God by Nature yet affirm him to have been a Sinner the greatest of Sinners nay Sinfulness it self do more derogate from the Honour of our Redeemer For Answer This is so far from being a moot Point that it is no point at all unless you can find any of your Antinomians that assert what you here say they affirm You cannot but know your Antinomians own and assert strenuously That the Lord Jesus was ever holy harmless separate from Sin a Lamb without spot in his own person being perfect God and perfect Man nay they

Faith in him or else we must feign that a Believer hath a Spiritual Life in him that is not from Christ if he have Faith before he is united to Christ as some pretend and so there would be two Spiritual Lives in a Believer one before Union to Christ which works Faith and the other from Christ upon acting our Faith But this Ass of our own Spiritual Life and the Oxe of Christ's Life in us will not draw well together So that I think I may safely conclude this is no Heresie to say that Union to Christ is before Faith much less is that which follows an Heresie to say that we partake of the Spirit by vertue of that Vnion This is brought in as part of the fifth Heresie Whence do the Branches partake of the Sap of the Vine but from the Root by Vertue of Union to the Vine 'T is strange to admiration that this should be question'd by those who like Peter seem to be Pillars in the Church to call it an Antinomian Heresie to say We partake of the Spirit by vertue of Vnion to Christ If the Spirit be not in us before Faith how can he convince of Sin in not believing and thereby work Faith Doth not the Scripture say plainly 1 Cor. 12.8 9. To one is given by the Spirit the word of Wisdom to another Faith by the same Spirit Doth the Spirit give Faith and is he not then in the Soul to work Faith before it is wrought Is not the Former before the Thing formed If so then sure my Dear Kratiste was in a great Mistake and has sadly imposed on those that profess Faith in our Lord Jesus to rank this for a Heresie That we partake of the Spirit by vertue of our Vnion to Christ which in Naturâ is before Faith The sixth as being much akin to the former I pass only with the naming of it 'T is Heresie he saith to say Justification in regard of Application must be before Believing Whose Saying this is or whence it is taken I know not If the meaning be that God applies it to us or reckons it to us before our Believing that we are Justified This is so far from Heresie that I think the contrary is a Contradiction Or 't is Nonsense for me to believe a Thing is mine before it is given me or applyed to me and so made mine And in that Sense the Application of Justification by God's Spirit to my Conscience that God hath loved me and given his Son for me this must first be applyed to me before I can believe it or else my Believing is but Presumption But if by Application of Justification before Believing he means that the Soul doth apply it to himself before his Believing I think he is to seek for any that hold that Tenet §. XXVII His seventh Heresie is this That the first Application ordine Naturae saltem is to an Vngodly Man eo nomine that he may believe That this is a blessed Gospel-Truth and no Heresie appears by what our Blessed Lord Jesus saith That he came not to call the Righteous but Sinners And his immediate Call made them follow him as Levi from being a Publican to be a believing Disciple Nay saith our Lord Publicans and Harlots enter into the Kingdom of God before you Ye believed not but the Publicans and Harlots believed Matth. 21.31 32. Here was Application to ungodly Wretches eo nomine that they might believe and when Publicans and Harlots they did believe and so came off from their Ungodliness Yea the Dog Syrophenaecian as Christ called her she had Faith given her while she was a Dog even to the Admiration of Christ himself who said O Woman great is thy Faith And saith the Apostle for a full Proof that the Application is to an ungodly Man eo nomine While we were Enemies we were reconciled to God by the Death of his Son Nay as God will have it the very word ungodly which they oppose as Heresie is asserted in the Scripture that the first Application of Christ is to an ungodly Man in Rom. 4.5 To him that believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly his Faith is counted for Righteousness If the Blessed Apostle saith God justifieth the ungodly I trow this is no Heresie in him but if Heterodox Dr. Crisp say the same words then 't is an Antinomian Heterodoxy Now there 's a great out-cry what do you make God to be Is God such a Friend to Sin as to justifie the Vngodly Doth it become the Holiness of God to justifie an ungodly Man This is the way to vindicate all licentious Antinomianism That God justifies the Vngodly and that while he is an Enemy he is reconciled to God O out upon such profane Antinomians We can allow the Apostle Paul to use such Language because we can distinguish this into he doth not justifie the Vngodly that the Apostle means so whatever he saith but we cannot bear it that Apochryphal Tobias should say so nor that Mysterious Nonsense say so as Mr. Williams called Mr. Cole we cannot bear it in him for this is to open a gap to Profaneness to say God justifieth the Vngodly §. XXVIII The eighth Heresie is to assert That we believe that we may be justified declaratively The Case I take to be thus The Apostle saith in Gal. 2.16 We believe that we may be justified by the Faith of Jesus from whence the Neonomians conclude that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere our Act of Faith is that very Thing which justifies us or that we are justified by our Work of Faith if not by Works of Faith and Holiness which sometimes they joyn yet at least by a Work by our Act of Believing Whereas the Orthodox according to the Homilies and Doctrine of the Church of England from plain Scripture put Faith it self from us as that Act that justifies and say Faith justifies only declaratively as it manifests to the Conscience our being justified by Christ's Blood Rom. 5.9 and freely by his Grace not our Grace of Faith through the Redemption that is in Jesus Rom. 3.24 Titus 3.7 It is still ascribed to his Grace not any Grace in us our Grace of Faith being only the Instrument or Hand given us of God to receive Christ and all in him If Justification be as they would have it from any Act of ours as the Ground or Cause of it then we are not freely justified by his Grace but by our Work of Believing which if not a Popish is an Arminian Tenet to blemish the Free Grace of God in Jesus Christ So that it may be safely concluded that it is no Heresie to say our Justification by Faith is declarative in as much as the Essence of Justification is by the Blood of Jesus and the Grace of God imputing it to us is the form of our Justification which being received by Faith is thereby manifested or declared to the Conscience by the Illumination of the Holy