Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
sin_n cause_n death_n meritorious_a 3,322 5 12.3613 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
A23656 Animadversions on that part of Mr. Robert Ferguson's book entituled The interest of reason in religion which treats of justification in a letter to a friend. Allen, William, d. 1686. 1676 (1676) Wing A1054; ESTC R5034 44,339 112

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

Animadversions On that part of Mr. ROBERT FERGVSON'S BOOK Entituled The INTEREST of REASON IN RELIGION Which Treats of JUSTIFICATION In a LETTER to a Friend LONDON Printed by T. R. for Walter Kettilby at the Bishop's head in St. Paul's Church-yard 1676. SIR I Return you with Mr. Ferguson's Book my hearty thanks for the Loan of it I have read it and find many things well said in it And where I find anything otherwise I impute it not to his want of ability if the Cause would bear it but the Cause it self in those particular Instances which I suspect him to be defective in For neither he nor any other of what ability soever he be can as Solomon sayes make that streight which God hath made crooked Eccles. 7.13 And therefore the greater the parts be of any man who yet cannot make work of a Cause he undertakes it doth but make me so much the more doubtfull of the goodness of that Cause if it were any whit doubtfull to me before I will give you one instance of this nature out of Mr. Ferguson's book Chap. 2 Sect 10. Where he asserts that Mr. Sherlock's Notion as he calls it of Justification is not any wayes maintainable but by perverting innumerable texts from their plain and naturall Sense to a Metaphorick and that it is accompanied with this fatall unhappiness of turning agreat part of the Bible into mere insignificant and empty Metaphors P. 402. 403. And then represents Mr. Sherlock's notion thus That we are only justified by believing and obeying the Gospel of Christ That the Sacrifice of Christ's death and the Righteousness of his life have no other influence upon our acceptance with God but that to them we owe the Covenant of Grace That is God being well pleased with the obedience of Christ's life and the Sacrifice of his death entered into a new Covenant with mankind wherein he promiseth pardon of Sin and eternal life to those who believe and obey the Gospel So that the Righteousness of Christ is not the formal cause of our Justification but the Righteousness of his life and death is the Meritorious Cause whereby we are declared Righteous and rewarded as Righteous persons The Covenant of Grace which God for Christs sake hath made pardoning our past sins and follies and rewarding a sincere though imperfect Obedience The Gospel by its great arguments and motives and powerfull assistances forms our minds to the love and practice of Holiness and so makes us inherently righteous and the Grace of the Gospel accepts and rewards that sincere Obedience which according to the Rigor and Severity of the Law could deserve no reward P. 404. Mr. Ferguson having made this recital out of Mr. Sherlock's book knew not how as it seems to make good his charge there-from unless Mr. S. would be so kind as to grant what Mr. F. doth affirm but Mr. S. himself no where asserts And therefore although he grants in P. 416. That in reserence to the mere demands of the Gospel we may in a proper sense be said to be justified Yet he saith that in reference to the Law which is that alone which accuseth us we cannot in any prepriety of speech be said to be justified but that justification wheresoever it regards our discharge from the accusation of the Law must be taken Metaphorically he meanes I suppose unless we are discharged from that accusation by having the righteousness of Christ imputed to us Whether this be true or no I shall put to the Tryal afterwards But in the mean time pray you consider how little reason Mr. F. had to go about to charge Mr. S. with holding Justification in a Metaphorick sense unless he had first shewed us that according to M. S's sentiment of Justification before represented he had made somthing else necessary to it than that which is an answering of the demands of the Gospel which yet he hath not done that I can see But indeed M. F. is so far from doing that as that he hath done the quite contrary as you cannot but perceive when you compare Mr. F's concession and Mr. S 's notion touching Justification together for Mr. F. acknowledgeth as I said before that in reference to the mere demands of the Gospel we may in a proper sense be said to be Justified and M. S. saith no more as M. F. recites him but that we are only Justified by believing and obeying the Gospel And if to believe and obey the Gospel be not to answer the demands of the Gospel and no more pray you get Mr. F. to tell us what is But if it be then Mr. F. instead of making good his charge against M. S. hath himself even fairly acquitted and discharged him from it and might well have taken himself off here and saved himself the labour of further prosecution But however though M. S. doth not yet it seems Mr. F. doth hold that we must be Justified if Justified at all by answering the demands of the Law as well as of the Gospel although the Scipture tells us that he that abideth in the Doctrine of Christ which is the Gospel he hath both the Father and the Son Rep. Jo. 9. And because Mr. F. is of opinion that the demands of the Law must be answered or else we cannot be Justified therefore he thinks Mr. S. ought to be so too which if he can perswade him to be then he doubts not but that he shall be able to make good his charge against him And therefore to lay a foundation for a necessity of a perfect legal Righteousness unto Justification though not inherent in our selves yet by derivation of it from our Saviour in whom it was he does in effect assert the Original Legal Covenant to remain still in force notwithstanding the establishing with men the Evangelical and that in order to our Justification it is not enough to have an Evangelical Righteousness to answer the demands of the Gospel but that we must also have a perfect legal Righteousness to answer the demands of the Law though not in our selves but by derivation from another as was said before Whether this be not so judge I pray you by his own words comparing what he sayes in P. 411. and P. 414. which are these Now as the introduction of the law of faith hath not abrogated the law of perfect obedience but this as well as that doth remain in force each of them requiring a conformity to its own demands So supposing us to answer all that the Gospel requires yet the other law abiding uncancelled and we being all guilty of the violation of its terms there lies accordingly a charge against us from which by Justification we are to be acquitted p. 414. And again p. 411. That secluding not only the righteousness of Christ's life but the satisfaction of his death as the Matter and the imputation of it as the formal Cause of justification it seems repugnant to the immutability and essentiall