Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
sin_n baptism_n preach_v remission_n 3,201 5 10.1727 5 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
A35303 A just reply to Mr. John Flavell's arguments by way of answer to a discourse lately published, entitled, A solemn call, &c. wherein it is further plainly proved that the covenant made with Israel on Mount Sinai, as also the covenant of circumcision made with Abraham, whereon so much stress is laid for the support of infants baptism ... : together with a reply to Mr. Joseph Whiston's reflections on the forementioned discourse, in a late small tract of his entituled, The right method for the proving of infants baptism ... / by Philip Cary ... Cary, Philip. 1690 (1690) Wing C741; ESTC R31290 91,101 194

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

this Question he hath plainly resolved in that late excellent and judicious Discourse of his Entituled The Doctrin of Justification by Imputed Righteousness p. 397. His words are these The whole entire nature of the Covenant of Works consisted in this that upon our Personal obedience unto the Law and the Rule of it we should be accepted with God and rewarded by him Herein the Essence of it did consist And whatever Covenant proceeds on these terms or hath the nature of them in it however it may be varied with Additions or Alterations is the same Covenant still and not another As in the Renovation of the Promise wherein the Essence of the Covenant of Grace was contained God did oftimes make other Additions unto it unto Abraham and David yet was it still the same Covenant for the Substance of it and not another so whatever variations may be made in or Additions unto the Dispensation of the first Covenant So long as this Rule is retained Do this and live It is still the same Covenant for the Substance and Essence of it I can add no more after so worthy a Sentence from so worthy a Person backt with so much Reason and Scripture Authority for the confirmation of the present Point And whether this was not the nature of the Sinai Covenant as the Dr. hath now stated it let all Men who have perused the Scriptures Judg. My Third Argument is this Argum. 3. That Covenant that Admitted not of Faith in the Redeemer nor Repentance of Sin since Pardon of Sin and Curse for Sin are Inconsistent could not be a Covenant of Faith but must of necessity be a Covenant of Works Yea the very same for substance and of the same stamp with that made with Adam himself But the Scripture doth assure us that such was the Nature of the Sinai Covenant Ergo That the Sinai Covenant Admitted not of Faith in the Redeemer is Evident since it Admitted not of Repentance of Sin It will be easily granted that the Doctrin of Christ was a Doctrin of Repentance This was the Doctrin of his Harbinger John the Baptist Matth. 3. 2. Repent ye for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand So Mark 1. 4. He came Preaching the Baptism of Repentance for the Remission of Sins And accordingly we are told concerning the Redeemer himself that God hath Exalted him with his own Right-hand to be a Prince and a Saviour for to give Repentance to Israel and the Forgiveness of Sins Acts 5. 31. Now that the Sinai Covenant Admitted not Repentance of Sin is as Evident since Pardon of Sin and Curse for Sin are Inconsistent For the Scripture doth Expressly assure us that as many as are of the Works of the Law are under the Curse For it is written Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the Book of the Law to do them Gal. 3. 10. which the Apostle quoteth from Deut. 27. 26. And hereunto Mr. Flavell himself gives a full Testimony in that forementioned Passage of his And if he will not stand to what he hath there Asserted but will needs shift it off by vain and groundless Distinctions his Worthy Brethren in their forementioned Annotations shall Confront him and Re-inforce the Truth which he hath there Asserted when they tell us upon 2 Cor. 3. 6. That the Law was only a Revelation of the Will of God concerning Man's Duty No Revelation of God's Grace either in Pardoning Men their Omissions of Duty doing Acts contrary to Duty or assisting Men to the Performance of their Duty So on the 7 th Verse The Law only Cursed Man shewed him no way how he should escape that Curse It Killed Men and led them to Eternal Death and Condemnation without shewing them any means of Life and Salvation The like they tell us upon Gal. 3. 10 12. where the Apostle tells us that that the Law is not of Faith but the Man that doth these things shall Live in them Their Note upon which is this The Law say they saith nothing of Faith in the Mediator Though Faith in God be commanded in the first Precept yet Faith in Christ is not commanded by the Law as that by which the Soul shall live For that which the Law saith is Do this and Live Or the Man that doth the things contained in the Law shall live in them Life in the Law is promised to those that do the things which it requireth not to them who having failed in their performances yet accept of the Lord Jesus Christ as the Redeemer which God hath sent and believe in him who justifieth the Ungodly And if all this be so that the Law admitted not of Faith in the Redeemer nor Repentance of Sin then let all Men judge whether my forementioned conclusion be not fully proved that the Law could be no other than a Covenant of Works yea the very same for Substance with Adam's Covenant Argum. 4. That Covenant that had not Christ for the Mediatour of it could never be a Covenant of Faith but of Works yea the same for Substance with Adam's Covenant But the Apostle speaking of the legal Covenant made with Israel at Mount Sinai tells us that Christ hath obtained a more excellent Ministry viz. than that of Moses by how much also he is the Mediatour of a better Testament which was established upon better Promises Heb. 8. 6 7 8 9. From whence it plainly follows that Christ was not the Mediatour of the Sinai Covenant Therefore that Covenant could never be a Covenant of Faith but of Works yea the same for Substance with that made with Adam himself Argum. 5. That Covenant that was not confirmed by the Blood of Christ which alone can cleanse us from all unrighteousness but onely by the Blood of Bulls Goats and Calves and the Ashes of an Heifer sprinkling the unclean which onely sanctified to the purifying of the Flesh and could never take away Sins nor make him that did the Service perfect as pertaining to the conscience Could not be a Covenant of Faith but of Works the same for Substance with Adam's Covenant But the Ceremonial Law was of this Nature and the Sacrifices thereof wherewith alone it was dedicated Heb. 9. 9 10 11 12 13 14. chap. 10. 1 2 3 4. c. Therefore that Covenant could not possibly be a Covenant of Faith but of Works yea the same for Substance with Adam's Covenant Argum. 6. That Covenant that was not confirmed by the Blood of Christ no nor so much as by the Blood of Bulls or Goats or Calves could never be a Covenant of Faith but of Works yea the same for Sustance with Adam's Covenant But the Law written in Stones was so far from being confirmed by the Blood of Christ that it was never that we read of dedicated with any other sort of Blood whatsoever Ergo But there are 3. Scriptures from whence you will needs conclude that the Sinai Covenant is a Gospel