Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sin_n	apostle_n	law_n	transgression_n	5,619	5	10.4785	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47166	Quakerism no popery, or, A particular answere to that part of Iohn Menzeis, professor of divinity in Aberdeen, (as he is called) his book, intituled Roma mendax Wherein the people called Quakers are concerned, whom he doth accuse as holding many popish doctrins, and as if Quakerism, (so he nick-names our religion,) were but popery-disguised. In which treatise his alleadged grounds for this his assertion, are impartialy and fairly examined and confuted: and also his accusation of popery against us, justly retorted upon himself, and his bretheren. By George Keith.	Keith, George, 1639?-1716.	1675 (1675)	Wing K194; ESTC R213551	62,351	126

was so farr from condemning it as hereticall That a man by the Grace of GOD might be free from sin that he expresly affirmeth it himself as possible It is one thing sayeth he to ask whether any man in this life is withouth sin another if he can or may be And as to the question if he may he answereth affirmatively That he may be the Grace of GOD and free-will This he said in opposition to Pelagius who affirmed That a man by free-will without the Grace of GOD may be free from all sin And the very same which Augustin said in this matter lib. 2. de pec mer. remiss we say And seeing as I suppose I. M. will not condemn Augustin as Popish in this particular I see not how he can co●demn Us without great partiality Moreover the same Augustin is so farr from holding it to be an error That a man by the Grace of GOD may be free from all sin that he sayeth expresly lib. de spiritu litera cap. 2. If it be defended and thought that some are or have been or shall be perfect with such purity how farr I can judge sayeth he they do not err much nor dangerously and yet I. M. and his Brethren think this a most dangerous error seeing every one that thinketh so doth err with a certain benevolence of mind if notwithstanding he who thinketh this think not himself to be such unless he do really and clearly perceive himself to be such but these are most earnestly and vehemently to be resisted who think that without the help of GOD by the proper power of mans-will they can either perfect righteousness or can profit in aiming after the same This he sayeth against the Pelagians which doth not reach us for we abho●e any such thought that any man without the Grace and supernaturall help of the Spirit of GOD can either finish or begin any good thing Others of the Fathers so called I could cite who do ●avour this perfect doctrin only I shall at present men●ion Athanasius the Great a man I suppose whom I. M. doth not suspect as guilty of Popery Who sayeth expresly in his fourth Oration ag●inst the A●●●n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Many were born holy and free or clean from all sin And he mentioneth in particular Ieremias and Iohn the Baptist but if I. M. is to be believed both Ieremias and Iohn were sinners and not clean or free from all sin even when born into the world yea when in the womb And in this he agreeth with the Papists and not we both of them holding That many Infants are excluded from the Kingdom of GOD because of Originall sin Now as to these and such like Scripturs that are brought against the doctrin of perfection It hath been shown not only by many of our Friends that they doe not prove that a sinless state is not attainable in time but even the same hath been asserted and the doctrin of perfection in as great a latitude mantained by some famous men among the Protestants as by us particularly by Sebastian Castellio a man much beloved and esteemed by many however Calvinists may think of him Yea and diverse of the present Church of England whom I. M. owneth to be Protestants hath appeared in defence of this doctrin as Hen. More and others As also our Countrey-man William Forbes as may be seen in his book called Considerationes modestae pacificae controversiarum Where he citeth diverse Protestants of the same mind with himself who hold That by the Grace of GOD the Law of GOD may be performed according unto that divine condescension called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereby he requireth obedience of us according unto that proportion and measure of divine Grace and ability that is given us and in this true sense we own perfection and a perfect state attainable in time which yet doth still admit of a growth in degrees Be ye perfect said Christ Matth. 5.48 as your heavenly Father is perfect Surely this is a sinless perfection that is here commanded and it is as sure that what Christ commandeth He giveth sufficient ability of Grace to perform For His yoke is easie and his burden i● light Matth. 11.30 and His commandements are not grievous 1. Iohn 5.3 And according to this sayeth Prosper ad Demetriadem In omnibus monitis Dei c. In all the monitions and commandements of GOD there is one and the same reason both of divine grace and mans obedience And indeed this is the great difference betwixt the Law and the Gospell that the Law did command but was weak as said the Apostle whereas the gospell is the power of GOD unto salvation to every one that believeth which salvation is from sin and not in sin And said Christ to his Disciples Now are yee clean through the Word that I have spoken unto you Iohn 15.3 but to that Objection both of Papists and Others out of Iohn 1. Ioh. 1.8 If wee say wee have no sin wee deceive our selves I Ansuere first with Augustin exp ep ad Gal. Aliuà est non peccare aliud non habere peccatum It is one thing not to sin another thing not to have sin This place doth not favour them who say that men cannot be free from actuall sinning i● this life Seeing Iohn doth not say if we say we sin not but if we say we have not sin By which sin some doe understand that which the Regenerat find in the flesh as a temptation unto sin or that which tempteth thereunto which nevertheless not being anywise consented unto is not their sin although it be their great tryall and a great occasion unto them to desire to be dissolved t●at they may be free of all temptations unto sin as well as of sin it self Secondly the same Apostle saith immediatly after if we confess our sins He is faithfull and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness Now he that is cleansed from all unrighteousness is cleansed from all sin because sin is unrighteousness and seing it belongeth to the faithfulness and justice of GOD to doe it certainly He will doe it to every one that diligently improveth that Divine grace that is given to that end yea he saith also verse 7. The blood of Iesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin which he speaketh in the present time Now to be defiled with sin and to be cleansed from all sin at one and the same time implyeth a contradiction Therefore the Apostles wordes are to be referred to two severall times and states which looseth suffic●ently the contradiction Nor doth it follow that the Apostle Iohn was at this time defiled with sin more then that Iames was a Curser when he said of the Tongue Herewith curse we men Iames. 3.9 But both Iohn and Iames words are to be understood after the manne● of ane usuall figure called Metaschematism●s as also the Apostle Paul Rom. 7. from

verse 14. to verse 25. For to say that Paul at that time when he wrot that Epistle was carnall sold under sin being in captivity to the law of sin in his members i● a very absurd thing and condemned by sundry judicious and famous Protestants as Bucer and Musculus as they are cited by Arminius The Apostle therefore is describing not his present condition but the condition of others and of himself as they were in the strugling and warfaire estate before the victory was attained wheras the same Apostle speake● of a victory both here and eleswhere Here as cap. 8.2 for the law of the spirit of life in Christ Iesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death Elsewhere as 1. Cor. 15. verse 55.56.57 O death where is thy sting O grave where is thy victory The sting of death is sin and the strength of sin is the law but thanks be to GOD which giveth us the victory through our Lord Iesus Christ see also Rom. 8.57 2. Tim 4.7 Another objection they make from 1. Kings 8.46 There is no man that sinneth not Like unto this i● Chron. 6.36 Eccles. 7.20 To which I answere that the words being in the second future may be translated in the potentiall mood as indeed Iunius and Tremellius truly translate it thus there is no man who may not sin this we doe not deny for a possibility of sinning is consistent with a perfect and sinless estate as w●s the state of Adam before he fell he was innocent and yet he could sin it is one thing non posse peccare that a man cannot sin which is the highest perfection Another thing posse non peccare that a man is able not to sin As for that place Rom. 3.10 taken out of Psal. 14.1.23 there is none righteous no not one It is manifest that it is underst●od of men in the naturall unconverted and unjustified state and so is impertinently alleadged against per●ection But the main and most ordinary Objection is from the words of the Prayer which Christ taught his Disciples Forgive us our sins as we forgive them that sin against us Matthew 6.12 Which Prayer is to be daily put up unto GOD as appears by the preceeding petition Give us this day our daily bread so that as the best on earth need daily bread they need also daily to say Forgive us our sins To which I answere First That this place doth no more militate against perfect sanctification then it doth against perfect justification which is comprehensive of a forgivness of all sin Now doth not I. M. and his Brethren acknowledge yea plead for it that the Sai●ts have all their sins forgiven them in time yea that the least Saint hath perfect forgivness let them see what answere they can give to the one which we cannot give to the other I answere Secondly forgivness of sin may be understood two wayes First As it is received by every particular Saint and Child of GOD in his heart and conscience by the secret intimation of the Spirit of GOD and so far● as ●e having received this secret intimation he desireth to retain it and that it may be continued with him he may pray for it as he doth for his bread which yet he hath for many have daily bread although they are to pray for it that they may have it as a gift out of the Fathers-hand and in that they acknowledge him to be the giver of it and every good thing Secondly As it signifieth that solemn absolution which God by Christ shall give to all the Saints at the last-day and so to pray for forgiveness of sin is to pray that none of our sins which we have committed may be laid to our charge in that day but that we may receive that finall and signall absolution of them and for this the most perfect may and ought to pray Before I goe from this second alleadged article of Popish doctrin I shall only remind I. M. how it is and how it may be very safely retorted upon Himself and his Brethren who together with Papists doe wrest and abuse those and such like Scripturs before mentioned to plead against a sinless state and so to uphold the Devills-Kingdom SECT IV. Where the alleadged agreement about Iustification is considered and examined A Third instance of Popish doctrin charged by I. M. upon the people called Quakers is That men are justified by a righteousness wrought in them But unless he can prove that this doctrin is contradictory unto the Sc●rpturs testimony it is not a Popish doctrin although Papists doe hold 〈◊〉 more then it is a Popish doctrin to hold That there is one GOD. Nor is I. M. ignorant how many doe hold Iustification to be by an inward righteousness whom he doth notwithstanding acknowledge to be true Protestants and these not only some of them Presbyterians such as Baxter but of the Episcopall-way not a few if not the greatest number as witness their books on that subject Also that the primitive Protestants diverse of them were of the same mind William Forbes doth show in his book already cited to which I refer the Reader ye● Iames Durham a noted Presbyterian doth sufficiently clear us of Popery as where he declareth in his commentary on the Revelation degr 11 That where Christ is rested upon for Iustification and his Sanctification acknowledged they ought not who doe so to be blamed as guilty of Popery although they hold that Repentance Love and other inward spirituall vertues and graces are necessary to Iustification as Faith is Now we indeed rest upon Christ alone and not upon Mary nor any other of the Saints as the Papists are said to doe and the satisfaction of Christ we doe acknowledge in the true sense of it so as that by his obedience death and sufferings he hath indeed obtained remission of sins unto all who truely believe and repent Now that repentance is expresly required in Scripture as necessary unto remission of sins which I. M. doth hold at least to be a great part if not the whole of our Iustification see Acts 3.19 Repent ye therefore and be converted that your sins may be bloted out c. Observe here not only repentance but conversion are both expresly required in order to forgiveness or blotting out of sin and consequently in order to Iustification seeing our Adversaries acknowledge that forgiveness is a part of Iustification and Calvin seemeth to place it wholly therein But that repentance and conversion are a great part if not comprehensive of the whole work of inward righteousness wrought in us by the Spirit of GOD I suppose I. M. will not deny See Acts 26.18 To turn them from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto GOD that they may receive forgiveness of sins and inheritance among them that are sanctified Here expresly the turning from darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto GOD is required in order to

way to that Spirit which opposeth Him they are the Temple of GOD not realy but seemingly not in truth but in show and that the Scripture sometimes is so to be derstood to wit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or according to opinion or appearance only I.M. himself doth well allow But tho we had the Letter of the Bible conveyed to us by the Popes and Church of Rome which yet may be doubted the case is not alike as to Ordination For I may take my Fathers goods from a Thief seeing they are my Fathers and mine by my Father But if that Thief hade killed my Father who was the true KING of the Country and made himself the KING and offereth to make me a Magistrat under him I am not to receive it from him because he is not de jure one himself so that there is one reason or manner of conveying Goods another of conveying an Office seeing the Goods may be mine antecedently to the conveying the Office only becomes mine in the conveying We have a right to the Scripture immediatly of GOD who hath given it us for our profit and comfort and therefore it is ours antecedently to all conveyance But to be ordained is not a mans right before but in the Act it becometh his GEORGE KEITH Write at ABERDEEN in SCOTLAND in the Beginning of the Sixth Moneth 1675. SECT XII BY ANOTHER HAND Wherein we are further vindicated from the Imputation of Popery unjustly cast upon us and how much more truely it agreeth to our Opposers is evidenced by a short Account of many weighty particulars wherein they agree with Romanists against us I Suppose the Reader by the perusall of the Former Treatise is sufficiently informed and perswaded how much I. M. and his Brethren have abused us in casting upon us the Imputation of Popery and how innocent we are of that charge But their crime is so much the greater that they falsly charge us of that of which themselves are highly guilty which briefly to demonstrat for Thy further satisfaction is the business of these two last Sections If we consider the principles and doctrins of the Romanists and those of I. M. and his Brethren and those of the Quakers there is no man of reason can deny but that they aggree Ten Times more with the Papists then doe the Quakers as will thus easily appear First The Papists and I. M. and his Brethren agree as to their notions and distinctions of Trinity and Persons which the Quakers deny who though they confess Father Son and Spirit and that these three are one according to the Scripturs yet deny the School-mens uncertain notions and unscripturall terms of TRINITY and PERSONS so here the Papists and I. M. agree against the Quakers Secondly The Papists and I. M. and his Brethren agree in affirming that Infants are really guiltie of Adams sin before they committ actually any of their own which the Quakers deny they are untill they actually sin though they acknowledge a Seed of sin in Infants conveyed unto them by reason of Adams transgression Thirdly The Papists and I. M. and his Brethren agree in denying there is a Saving Evangelicall Supernatural Light in all men by which they may be saved without the use of other outward means if GOD necessarly abstract them from them both affirming that such as have not the Scripturs or some to preach to them or baptise them c must of necessity perish unless the Lord make use of some extraordinary means All which the Quakers deny who though they believe the Scripturs and outward knowledge of CHRIST to be both very usefull and comfortable and absolutly necessary to be believed by such as GOD conveyeth it to yet can not think GOD so unmercifull or unjust as to damne those for not believeing that which he never affordeth them an occasion to hear who if they obey and follow the LIGHT which is the Gospel preached in them may come to be saved Fourthly The Papists and I. M. agree in affirming that humane learning and naturall parts are more Essentiall qualifications to Ministers and Preachers then the Grace of GOD averring that men may be true Ministers without the Grace of GOD but not without the other which the Quakers deny and condemne Fifthly The Papists and I. M. agree in deryving the power of their Ministry by ane outward succession which together with the use of outward ordination they judge sufficient to constitute a Minister though he want ane inward call from GOD'S-Spirit reckning people are obliedged to hear him and look upon him as a Minister because of this outward formality of ordination without questioning his inward call Whereas on the contrary they agree in affirming that whatever inward call from GOD'S Spirit a man have he ought not to be heard nor received as a Preacher untill he obtaine this outward approbation All which the Quakers deny as Antichristian Sixthly The Papists and I. M. and his Brethren agree in affirming that the Clergie ought to be a distinct sort of Persons distnguished from the rest of the people by their BLACK COATS c. So that it is not lawfull for Honest Trades-men such as was the Apostles to preach who have not past their APPRENTICE-SHIP at the University and there Learned the ART and TRADE of Preaching But the Quakers say the contrary believing all may prophecy if moved thereunto and that ane honest trade is no-wayes inconsistent with a Gospel Minister Seventhly The Papists and I.M. with his Bretheren agree in affirming that Preachers are not to wait to speak as the Spirit gives them utterance but ought to study it in their Closets before hand and then when the BELL ringeth repeat over before the people as the School-boyes doe their Lessons and the Commedians their parts upon the stages But all this is denyed by the Quakers Eightly The Papists and I. M. and his Brethren agree that Ministers ought to have a SET-LIMITED-HIRE and ought not to supply their wants with their hands as did the honest Apostle Paul but sit at ease and feed of the fat and cloath themselves with the finest of the woole and take from such by violence and poinding as cannot for conscience sake hear them and so receive none of their spirituals But all this the Quakers deny as Antichristian Nynthly The Papists and I. M. and his present Prelatick Bretheren not his OLD PRESBYTERIAN and INDEPENDENT FREINDS agree in affirming that all Ministers are not alike but that there ought to be DIOCESIAN BISHOPS over the rest whom men must call MY LORD Which is denyed and condemned by the Quakers as Antichristian Tenthly The Papists and I. M. and his Brethren agree in affirming that men may yea and ought to pray preach and doe all other acts of worship when they please whether they be moved and influenced by GOD'S Spirit or not which the Quakers deny as will worship and superstition Eleventhly The Papists and I. M. with his Bretheren agree in