Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sin_n	adam_n	nature_n	posterity_n	3,607	5	9.0097	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A54083	The fig-leaf covering discovered, or, Geo. Keith's explications and retractions of divers passages out of his former books, proved insincere, defective and evasive by John Penington.	Penington, John, 1655-1710.	1697 (1697)	Wing P1227; ESTC R22450	96,997	142

were under I Quer● what he thinks of that place of Scripture 2 Cor. 5.19 which was brought by him in that very Page 43. 〈◊〉 Vni Gr. out of which he gave us a Citation in this ver● § and hath not retracted though he could not chu● but see it that God was in Christ reconciling the World 〈◊〉 himself Did it relate to the time present only 〈◊〉 was the Present Tense with him now Or to th● time past also And when himself said Way to City 〈◊〉 God p. 125. Even at Man's Fall the Seed of the Wo●man was given not only to bruise the Serpent's Head but also to be a Lamb or Sacrifice to attone or paci● the Wrath of God towards Men and this is the Lamb that was slain from the beginning of the World Did he intend that this commenced only from the Age the Apostles lived in Or will he upon second thoughts retract and correct this as unsound which he hath never yet touched upon though we have often laid it before him For this is either true or false Doctrine If true then not limitted and restricted to the Age of the Apostles and downwards only If false it is a Doctrinal Error a Fundamental one the faint tearms of undue Application will not do here which I doubt not but himself foresaw with respect to this and many other places objected against him and therefore designedly to have omitted them Who if he ever intend to be approved a sincere Convert among the People whom he now seeks shelter under must mend his Hand at it or they must receive him upon very easie tearms § 9 Before I enter into a particular Disquisition of what G. K. offers in § 9. finding he words it darkly as well as useth Deceit in the repeating of it I shall state the Doctrine delivered by himself Vni Gr. p. 69 to 72. and then Animadvert what he saith upon what himself gives After an Acknowledgment p. 67. that Adam was at first made with an ability or power to know and do the Will of God which he lost by his Fall he tells us in his 3dly This Loss is descended upon all Adam's Posterity yet not imputed to them before their own Actual or Personal Transgression Who Answering several Objections of our Adversaries relating to Infants being Sinners as desce●ded from Adam asserts p. 69. That there is a Seed of Sin transmitted from Adam unto all his Posterity in the Natural Birth but that this is not Mens Sin nor imputed unto them before Actual Transgression and p. 70 that the word Adam is not understood of that first Person whose Name was Adam but of that sinful and sinning Nature which being derived from him bears his Name And in p. 72. If God hath de novo or of a new given unto all Men a sufficient Principle of Light and Life to know and do his Will then he may say as in Isaiah What could have been done more unto my Vineyard c viz. in Point of Righteousness in giving that which was sufficient to enable it to bring forth good Fruit and consequently in punishing it for remaining unfruitful And towards the close of that Page he saith Let the Scriptures be searched throughout and it shall never be found that Men are simply condemned or made inexcuseable for Adam's Sin but for their own Sins in the first place and for those of their Ancestors but consequentially c. This last Citation G. K. gives first then inferrs from that other Citation if God hath de novo c. which he also gives that he Argued from the Righteousness of God not simply considered but with respect to a new Dispensation after the Fall To which I Answer The new Dispensation is a Fruit of Mercy as well as Justice extended to the Vineyard in order to its bringing forth Fruit his Punishment afterwards is an Effect of his Righteousness but God 's not punishing Infants who never sinned is an Effect of Justice of Righteousness only Yet that he may put a Trick upon his Reader he jumbles these two Quotations together which spake of different things the first of a new Dispensation to Mankind in order to bring forth Fruit the second of Infants not being condemned who never sinned and that in these words I did give p. 72. that none are simply condemned and sent to Hell for Adam 's Sin for I cannot agree to that uncharitable Opinion that any dying Infants perish or suffer the Fire of Hell-fire sim●ly and only for Adam's Sin what God in strict Justice might do is one thing and what he will do is another And now I desire the Reader to observe the Man's Falshood while pretending to give his own words the Sense of which he hath notoriously perverted fetching in what was written in the beginning of the Page which respected God's Righteousness in a renewed Visitation and expecting of Fruit and clapping to the end of the second Quotation which spake of the not condemning Infants who never had sinned those words what God in strict Justice might do c. as if they had immediately followed in the Quotation whereas they preceeded half a Page and more above and were adduced to a different end Which is such a degree of Notorious Prevarication and Falshood that is rarely found in the worst of our Antagonists By this time the Reader may give a guess what the Man would be at which till I had thus traced him was very obscure to me For his pretended dissatisfaction with the method he had used from p 67 to 72. in the way of managing this Argument which he calls effectual and solid in the main as to the substance of it yet not with respect to diverse weighty Circumstances in answering Objections against it which is all he gives so much as leaning towards a Retractation could give me no light into it Who as he saith not that his former Arguments were unsound but that they were effectual and solid in the main So wherein any Circumstance is otherwise he assigns not but by his Legerdemain and Foul Play leaves a more open way for us to track his Sense here than in many of the foregoing which Course is not to his Credit In his Quotation out of p. 69. he is not quite so gross What he had there said of a Seed of Sin its being transmuted from Adam into all his Posterity he gives at large with this addition I still affirm it what followed in that place that it is not Mens Sin nor imputed unto them before Actual Transgression he takes no notice of nor doth he so much as O'●e it But to Excuse himself from Answering all these Objections that are raised he saith about the manner of its conveyanoe and being transmitted and by what chinks c. he confesseth it puzzleth him And that is a wonder he will allow any thing puzzleth him Nor do I think he would have alledged it but that he was loth to go too far in seeming

a Metaphor or Allegory for with such Metaphors Allegories and figurative Speeches the Scripture aboundeth in treating of the Spiritual and Divine Refreshments and Enjoyments of the Saints as when they are called Bread Wine Milk c. Answ To this himself shall reply out of p. 14 15. of the same Book where having proved from several Scriptures adduced that the Spiritual discerning is held forth under the names of all the five Senses of Seeing Hearing Tasting Smelling Feeling or Handling he adds But saith the Natural Man such an one as G. K. is now become say I These are only but Metaphors and Figures and then replies Albeit these names be so yet that hinders not but the Spiritual Mysteries represented under them are real and SUBSTANTIAL things as really affecting the Spiritual Senses as the outward Things affect the Natural And indeed these Outward Things are but Figures of the Inward and Spiritual which as far exceed and transcend them in Life Glory Beauty and Excellency as a living Body doth the Shadow so that this whole visible World is but a Shadow in respect of the Spiritual and Inward Thus far G. K. formerly whereby it appears that he then ascribed the Shadow the Metaphor to the Outward the thing shadowed forth to the Inward Now he assigns on ●he contrary the Metaphor Allegory or Figure to the ●nward and the thing shadowed forth to the Outward ●nd yet he is not so Ingenuous as to own a Change in his Judgment but would render his meaning now and formerly the same Nor hath he here only asserted That the Seed was a Substance but also in his Way cast up p. 60. a Book printed Anno 1678 and as yet unretracted hath ranked the contrary Opinion among the great and woful Mistakes and Misconceptions of the Professors of Christianity who in his seventh Argument p. 64. thus hath it The Saints feel it in them as really to be a part or Particle of the very Substance of Heaven viz. Of that Spiritual and Invisible Heavens where the Saints live as they do feel the Body of their Outward Man to be a Part or Particle of the Substance of this Outward World And having described this Divine Birth to be not only a Substance but a composed Substance of Body and Spirit he plainly affirms p. 65. The Spirit is a measure of the Spirit or Soul of Christ the Heavenly Man But if he will not believe what himself said formerly nor yet retract his manifold Contradictions and Absurdities 't is to be hoped the unbyassed and considerate will see him in his proper Colours and that his Covering is but a Fig-leaf Garment But this Allegorical and Figurative Sense as he termeth it of Christ's Flesh and Blood he saith ought not to divert our Minds nor take off our Faith from Christ's Flesh without us c. Answ I readily grant it For the advantage of that Faith as Paul said of Circumcision of old to the Jews is much every way Rom. 3.1 2. Yet this excludeth not the Heathen to whom the History hath not been revealed and who are the Vncircumcision that keepeth the Righteousness of the Law Chap. 2. v. 26. from any Benefit thereby though not an equal This himself seemed sensible of when in his Light of Truth Triumphing printed Anno 1670 and not yet retracted he said As many have suffered Hurt through the Disobedience of the First Man to wit Adam who have not known expresly that ever such a Man was o● the manner of his Disobedience so why may not EVEN MANY receive Benefit through the Obe●dience of Christ in the outward who have not expresly known his outward Coming and Sufferings otherwise Adam's Disobedience were more effectual for Man's Destruction than the Obedience of Christ were for his Salvation His following Assertion that to believe in Christ as he gave his Body of Flesh outwardly to be broken for us and his Blood outwardly to be shed for the Remission of our Sins is the eating of his Flesh and drinking of his Blood as well as the inward Enjoyment of his Life in us and that this is clear from John 6.29 35 40 47 48. I must a little compare with what he hath said elsewhere In his Book entituled Rector Corrected Printed Anno 1680 a passage not yet retracted he blames his Adversary p. 19. for saying He would prove that the Flesh and Blood spoken of John 6. are not a spiritual invisible Substance retorting thus Then what must we infer from this Interpretation of thine but that we must eat visible Flesh and drink visible Blood But hear him further ibid. When the Capernaanites understood it of visible Flesh and Blood he told them He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him to signifie that it was an inward and invisible Eating of an inward invisible Substance whereof he did speak For proof of which he then quoted John 61 62 63. at large Again P. 21. he saith Christ's giving his Flesh for the Life of the World is more than to offer up his visible Flesh upon the Cross for he giveth his Flesh to eat and his Blood to drink whereas many that believe Historically that his visible Flesh was offered upon the Cross do not eat his Flesh and drink his Blood for they have not Life in them c. So that with G. K. one while eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood is an inward and invisible eating of an inward and invisible Substance and it is proved to be so out of John 6. and his Adversary branded with Capernaanitism for denying the Flesh and Blood there spoken of to be a spiritual invisible Substance Anon Christ spake there of a Belief in him as his Body of Flesh and Blood was broken and shed outwardly it is not Capernaanitism in him it seems so to assert though it was in the Rector and that very Scripture is referred to for proof that he did so and yet G. K. no Changeling the mean while if ye will believe him who not only acknowledgeth That the Flesh which he said they were to eat and his Blood they were to drink was that which he had before he descended Imm. Rev. p. 228. but also in the foregoing Page hath it That they did eat his Flesh and drink his Blood as TRULY and REALLY in measure before he came in that Body of Flesh which was born of the Virgin Mary as the Saints have done since Again p. 258. This Body of Christ of which we partake is NOT THAT which he took up when he came in the Flesh outwardly but that which he had from the beginning c. See also Way cast up p. 95. And thus referring my Reader to what may further occurr upon this subject when I come to my Sect. 3. § 1. I betake my self to his next Paragraph § 5 Upon his giving us § 5. a Quotation of Imm. Rev. p. 36 37. relating to Infallibility that As it relates to the Seed