Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sin_n	commandment_n	law_n	revive_v	3,670	5	10.8910	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A70924	Romes destruction, or, Expresse texts and necessary consequences drawn out of the word of God, for the condemning of the doctrine of the Roman church, and justifying of that of the reformed churches first written in French, by C.D.R., a French noble-man ; and now published in English, at the solicitation of divers religious men of this nation by Jam. Mountaine.	C. D. R.; Mountaine, James.	1641 (1641)	Wing R11; ESTC R10609	52,610	234

prove it by this expresse text out of Saint Paul And you saith he being dead in your sinnes and through the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickned together with him having forgiven you all trespasses Colos. 2. 13. Now even as a dead man cannot doe so much as to stir his fingers end unlesse he be raised againe So a man dead in sinne cannot doe any good work unlesse God raise him first and regenerate him inwardly by his spirit The same Apostle teacheth it plainly in another place saying That it is God which worketh in us both to will and to doe according to his good pleasure Phil. 2. 13. The holyest men though endued with the spirit of God and ordinarily accompanied with his grace have alwaies acknowledged themselves to be sinners and very unable to doe good works Saint Paul speaketh thus of himselfe and also of all others in his person For I was alive without the Law once but when the Commandement came sinne revived and I died I am carnall sould under sinne I know that in me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing For to will is present with me but how to performe that which is good I finde not For the good that I would doe I doe not but the evill which I would not that I doe Rom. 7. 9. 14. 15. 18. 19. Is it not then a meere ridiculous foolery to teach that a man destitute of the Grace of God may doe any good work to obtain Grace seeing that these which have this Grace already doe not doe the good they would but doe the evill which they would not having alwaies some corruptions of the flesh opposing the desires of the spirit And therefore they must confesse that we doe good workes after we have received Grace whence it followeth that their Doctrine is false as I prove it by this argument If we doe good works after we are received into Grace Then it followeth that our works doe not dispose us to obtaine that Grace which we have already and without which we cannot apply our selves to good works But the Antecedent is true therefore the Consequent also CHAP. IV. That our Lord Jesus Christ hath fully and perfectly satisfied the justice of God for our sins both for the guilt and punishment thereof and consequently that it is a vain and unprofitable thing to desire to satisfie again unto the same by works THat which our Adversaries teach concerning satisfaction is That God releaseth unto the sinner all the guilt and forgiveth him the eternall punishment due unto it But that he will have it turn'd into a Temporal punishment alledging that if in our Justification nothing were found but the forgivenesse of sins it would be perfect mercy but that there is some other thing whereby the justice of God appeareth To be short The Doctrin of these Doctors is that God for the manifestation of his justice wil have the justified sinner to satisfie Gods justice for the Temporal punishment of his sinnes otherwise his justice is not satisfied Answer It is an old wile of Sathan which he hath alwaies practised by his false Prophets to smother and bury as much as in him lyeth the meanes whereby God is pacified with us and his justice fully satisfied Therefore I aske of them whether Christ hath satisfied to the justice of God or no If he hath not satisfied it he is not our Saviour and we are still in our sinnes lyable to the curse of the Law Galat. 3. 13. But if Christ hath satisfied the justice of God for sinne it followeth that it is satisfied and declared in this alone satisfaction of his and by consequent that it is a vain and an unprofitable thing to desire to satisfie the same again Now that Christ hath satisfied fully the justice of God for sinne these expresse texts shewe it clearly and plainly He hath born our griefes and carried our sorrowes He was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities The chastisement of our peace was upon him and with his stripes we are healed The Lord hath laid on him the iniquitie of us all Esay 53. 4. 5. 6. And the Apostle Saint Paul teacheth us That he hath reconciled all things unto himselfe having made peace through the blood of his Crosse whether they be things in Earth or things in Heaven Colos. 1. 20. Again The Mediator is one between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus who gave himselfe a ransome for all 1. Tim. 2. 5. 6. Now the Jesuits and other Doctors of the Roman Church to avoid this use to make a distinction of guilt and punishment saying that Christ hath satisfied for the guilt and eternall punishment but not for that Temporal punishment reserved for the sinner justified for which he is bound to satisfie the justice of God But this is brought in to no purpose For I will stop up this passage upon them in producing expresse texts and necessary consequences drawn out of the Word of God that shew plainely the contrary First of all the Prophet Esay hath told us in the forenamed place that Christ hath not onely borne our griefes but our sorrowes also which are not the guilt but the punishment of our sinnes And to say that this is true as touching the eternall and not the Temporall punishment is to no purpose For S. Paul saith That there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus Rom. 8. 1. But what punishment soever is imposed for the satisfying of Gods justice is a condemnation Therefore there is no punishment imposed to satisfie the justice of God Secondly The same Apostle teacheth us That by Grace we are saved through Faith and that not of our selves it is the gift of God not of works least any man should boast Saint Paul teacheth us That he hath reconciled all things unto himselfe having made peace through the blood of his Crosse whether they be things in Earth or things in Heaven Colos. 1. 20. Again The Mediator is one between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus who gave himselfe a ransome for all 1. Tim. 2. 5. 6. Now the Jesuits and other Doctors of the Roman Church to avoid this use to make a distinction of guilt and punishment saying that Christ hath satisfied for the guilt and eternall punishment but not for that Temporal punishment reserved for the sinner justified for which he is bound to satisfie the justice of God But this is brought in to no purpose For I will stop up this passage upon them in producing expresse texts and necessary consequences drawn out of the Word of God that shew plainely the contrary First of all the Prophet Esay hath told us in the forenamed place that Christ hath not onely borne our griefes but our sorrowes also which are not the guilt but the punishment of our sinnes And to say that this is true as touching the eternall and not the Temporall punishment is to no purpose For S. Paul saith That there

Christ our Lord CHAP. V. That a man not being able to satisfie the Justice of God for his own sinnes cannot by consequent satisfie for the sinnes of others OUr Adversaries have not been contented to teach that a man is able to satisfie the Justice of God for the punishment due to his own sinnes but have gone a great deale farther and are come to such a height of absurdity as to teach That one man may satisfie for another and that God accepteth for the satisfaction of the one whatsoever is done by the other Now to give some colour to this Doctrine they alleadge that a justified man in this life may doe more satisfactory workes than is needfull for the paying of the Temporall punishment remaining for his sinnes And that having finished the satisfaction ordained for the said punishment All the penall and satisfactory workes that hee doth afterwards are superaboundant which workes being applyed unto another with an intention to satisfie for him are allowed as satisfactory for the punishment of his sins Answ. I have shewed already and proved out of expresse texts of the Word of God and invincible reasons That a man is not able to satisfie the justice of God for himselfe and by consequent much lesse for another Neverthelesse it is necessary to shew againe the impiety of this doctrine First if a man ought and may satisfie the justice of God for another it followes necessarily that Christ is not an alone Saviour but that he that satisfieth for another is also a Saviour of that man O horrible impiety For there is no salvation in any other neither is there any other name under heaven given unto men saith Saint Peter whereby we must bee saved but the name of Jesus Act. 4. 12. Moreover I demand of these Doctors whether a man can satisfie for another before hee have fully and wholy satisfied for his owne sinnes and have none left behinde for otherwise how can a man satisfie for another if himselfe be still indebted If so be then a man cannot be without sinne it followeth he cannot satisfie for himselfe and consequently much lesse for another But the first is true therefore the last also I prove the Antecedent of my Argument by the proper confession of these Doctors yeelding us that concupisence remaineth still in a man but yet they say for an evasion that it is not sinne as touching the guilt but an inclination and an alluring unto sinne being onely an originall punishment of the sinne of Adam wherein they deceive themselves grosly for whatsoever is a transgression of the Commandement of God is sinne as touching the guilt But concupiscence is a transgression of the commandement of God Thou shalt not covet Exod. 20. 17. Rom. 7. 7. Therefore concupiscence is sin as touching the guilt Item If sinne begets concupiscence in a man it followeth that concupiscence is sinne as touching the guilt for what other thing can sin beget in a man but sinne it selfe But the Antecedent is true for Sinne saith Saint Paul taking occasion by the commandement wrought in mee all manner of concupiscence Rom. 7. 8. Ergo the Consequent also and therefore a man is never without sinne sinne I say in the very guilt concupiscence remaining still in him Salomon teacheth us so much when he saith That a Just man falleth into sinne seaven times a day Pro. 24. 16. If we say saith Saint John that wee have no sinne we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us 1. Epist. 1. 8. I am carnall saith Saint Paul sould under sinne I know that in me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing For the good that I would I doe not but the evill I would not that I doe Rom. 7. 14. 18. 19. It is enough now O Lord said Elias take away my life for I am not better than my Fathers 1. King 19. 4. And Christ teaches us to say every day Forgive us our sinnes Matth. 6. 11. and Luke 11. 4. Whence it appeares plainely that a man is not able to keepe himselfe one day without offending his God That he hath sinne alwayes dwelling in him and consequently that he cannot wholly satisfie the justice of God In a word I aske of these Doctors how shall that man take upon him to satisfie for another that is not able to know whether hee hath sufficiently satisfied for himselfe or no and how shall one sinner trust to the satisfaction of another sinner that knowes not in what case the other standeth before his God CHAP. VI That the pretended treasure of the Roman Church was established onely for to weaken the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ and to make a little Saint of him that no body may know from the rest of the Saints BUt it was not yet enough for our Adversaries to teach men to satisfie the Justice of God and that they may doe it superabundantly one for another But they maintain moreover That the treasure of their holy mother Church is framed and replenished with these superabundant satisfactions of which treasure His Holinesse is the Guardian and may distribute them to those that have not satisfied sufficiently And it is here that they make Christ a little Saint that no body can know among the rest of the Saints Behold we here how they argue to cloak this Doctrin Saint Peter and Saint Paul say they about the latter end of their life had done so many painefull works that they had fully accomplished their satisfaction After that they suffered martyrdome this martyrdome was a good work done in Grace Therefore it was satisfactory and meritorious But so is it that it was not satisfactory for them for they had already wholly and fully satisfied It was therefore a worke of supererogation And so may one say of so many other Saints besides the infinite satisfaction of the blood of Christ and of the Virgine Marie who at the very point of her death was found to have gathered and heaped up together a very great heape of satisfactions In summe with the passion of Christ saith Panigarolle Lesson 11. Page 333. inasmuch as it is satisfactory are joyned also O horrible impiety the passion and superabundancies of al the Saints wherewith is framed the treasury of the holy mother Church to supply the want of them in whom their owne satisfactory workes are wanting All this being builded upon this naughty foundation of their pretended satisfaction which I have already refuted by expresse texts out of the Word of God and invincible reasons deserves not a new refutation But what Christian man is there that hearing but such impieties read will not wonder at the patience of God And shall not shiver for feare to see the merits of the passion of the sonne of God thus trampled under feet and that they should make of him a little Saint that no man can know among so many Saints nor sever his merit and satisfaction from so many merits and superaboundant satisfactions O Doctors how

I deny the Major For there are some undeserved rewards A Father may promise his Son a fine suit of cloathes if he write a good coppie Now that sonne deserves not that suite of clothes for doing well that coppie For what profit cometh to the father thereby neverthelesse the father will give the promised suit onely because of his promise Even so doth God to his children giving his Kingdome unto them without any desert but onely because he hath promised it Moreover a father may be induced to give the promised suite to his sonne because of his duty in doing his coppie well giveing his father content by that meanes But none of the faithfull can doe their duty towards God All have sinned saith Saint Paul Rom. 3. 23. and Whosoever saith Saint James offendeth in one point of the Law he is guilty of all Jam. 2. 10. All therefore are guiltie of the breach of the whole Law For who is he that hath not fayled in some one point or other of the Law And therefore our Adversaries are very farre wide of that pretended merit they doe attribute to their good workes CHAP. VIII That the Invocation of Saints departed is contrary unto the Word of God and tendeth to no other end but to give unto the creatures the honour and glory that belongeth unto the Creator THese Doctors keepe a great noyse and cry out very lowd that they are the true Church and that the doctrine which they teach is conformable unto the Word of God but when it cometh to the proofe they are mightily puzzled haveing nothing to shew but some few allegories which they bring in upon certaine points of controversie Like unto Foxes which runne into thickets and bushie places to save themselves True it is they make a great bucklet of these words This is my body which they thinke are very cleare to prove that the bread is transubstantiated into the body of Christ But I will shew in its due place in few words That they pervert the meaning of this place of Scripture taking this word is properly and without a figure which in all Sacraments ought to be taken for Signifieth of Representeth Now I will shew what slender cause they have to maintaine the Invocation of Saints departed and to teach that Christ is not our onely Mediator with God but that all the Saints in heaven are also our Mediators and that we must draw neere unto God by them as wee come neere unto the King by his familiar servants intreating them to pray for us A Doctrine which is absolutely false as I shall prove hereafter out of diverse expresse places and necessary consequences drawne out of the Word of God First of all then wee aske of them one expresse text out of the Word of God or one necessary consequence drawne out of the same for the proofe of this doctrine There they stand as mute as fishes Behold then a doctrine that hath neither prop nor foundation in the Word of God but is meerely invented by men against the Word of God as I will shew hereafter And albeit it were not contrary unto the same I yet maintaine that it ought to bee rejected of every Christian because it is a vaine worshipping of God to worship him after the Doctrine and commandements of men As our Lord Jesus Christ tearmeth it Marke 7. 7. Moreover I prove that this doctrine cannot be without great sinne For whatsoever is done without the Word of God is done without faith Faith saith Saint Paul commeth by hearing and hearing by the Word of God Rom. 10. 17. But the Invocation of Saints departed is done without the Word of God Therefore it is done without Faith Whatsoever is done without Faith is sin saith the same Apostle Rom. 14. 23. But the Invocation of Saints departed is done without Faith Therefore the Invocation of Saints departed is sinne In briefe That Doctrine which teacheth men to pray unto Saints departed is contrary unto the Word of God that teacheth That we ought to call upon none but on him in whom we have beleeved Rom. 10. 14. But we doe not beleeve in the Saints departed but in one onely God Father Son and holy Ghost Therefore we ought not to call upon Saints departed but upon God alone in whom we beleeve That Doctrine which teacheth men to goe unto God by his Saints as a man goes to the King by his familiar servants is contrary unto the Word of God which teacheth us to goe directly to Christ and that he is the onely Way to goe to the Father Come unto me saith he al ye that labour and are heavie laden and I will give you rest c. Math. 11. 28. He would not have us then goe unto him by the Saints departed I am saith he the Way the Truth and the Life no man commeth unto the Father but by me John 14. 6. That Doctrine which teacheth that there is divers Mediators with God is contrary unto the Word of God which teaches us That God is one and the Mediator one between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus 1. Tim. 2. 5. Item That God alone knoweth the hearts of all the sonnes of men 1. Kin. 8. 38. Whereupon it followeth That the Saints departed doe not know our prayers which are made in the heart and that by Consequent it is a vain and an idle thing to pray unto them The Argument which we draw out of this place of Saint Paul against the Invocation of Saints departed is thus If there be one onely Mediator between God and man to wit Christ Jesus It followeth That the Saints departed are not our Mediators with God and by Consequent that it is unprofitable to pray unto them to pray for us But the Antecedent is true Therfore the Consequent also Our Adversaries to put off this blow make a distinction saying That Saint Paul in this place speaketh not of a Mediator of Intercession but of a Mediator of Redemption and therefore that this place is not brought to the purpose for the Intercession of Saints a thing which is in controversie between them and us To which I answer First That they are not able to prove that distinction of a Mediator of Redemption and a Mediator of Intercession either by any expresse texts out of the Word of God or any necessary consequence drawn out of the same and therefore that it is false Secondly That on the contrary the Word of God teaching us that we have an Advocate with God which is Christ Jesus teacheth us Consequently that he is our alone Mediator of Intercession aswell as ●f Redemption If any man sin saith S. John we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the Righteous John 1. Epist. 2. 1. Veron the Jesuite in his answer to my Book Of the Cabale of the Jesuits pag. 18. answereth That to say there is one Mediator Therefore there is but one Mediator is no good Consequence and he bringeth in for example one that

remaining a Priest for ever and which cannot be hindered by death needeth no other Priest to be appointed in his roome And it is here that these new sacrificers labour in vain to prove their pretended calling For it is an imaginary charge which was never established by Christ nor practised by the Apostles Behold how they argue Christ said to his Disciples As my Father hath sent me so I send you But Christ was sent of the Father to sacrifice under the kindes of bread and wine after the order of Melchisedeck Therefore he sent his Apostles to sacrifice under the species of bread and wine according to this order and Consequently hath made them Priests I answer That if it be false that Melchisedeck did sacrifice bread and wine It followeth it is as false that Christ sent his Apostles to sacrifice him under the kinds of bread and wine but the first is true I have proved it already plainely here above therefore the last also But to make the Error of this allegation appear the more plainly we must but adde this to the second proposition of their Argument As Christ was sent of his Father so he sent his Apostles But Christ was sent of his Father to be a King a Prophet and for to sacrifice himself for the Redemption of many Therefore he sent his Apostles to be Kings prophets and to sacrifice themselves for the Redemption of many Who sees not the error and falshood of such a proposition This word As therfore must not be understood of the Kingly or Propheticall Office and Priesthood of Christ It is a presumption and temerity for men to assume unto themselves such titles but onely for the preaching of the Gospel administring of Sacraments and things which onely regard the Ministery Christ gave them not any other Office And as touching the Order of Melchisedeck after which Christ is a Priest for ever It is not in regard of the sacrifices but in regard of the persons sacrificing The Apostle teacheth it plainly handling the comparison between Christ and Melchisedeck In the first place he saith Heb. 7. 2. That Melchisedeck is by Interpretation King of Righteousnesse and also King of Peace which are titles belonging to Christ and which the Prophets also give him For he is King of Righteousnesse because he absolves and Justifies us by his obedience before God his Father He is also King of Peace because that making our peace and reconciliation he directeth us into the way of everlasting peace The Apostle goes on and saith That this Melchisedeck was without Father without Mother and without descent having neither beginning of daies nor end of life but being made like unto the Sonne of God abideth a Priest for ever Behold then wherin consisteth the agreement and similitude between our Lord Jesus Christ and Melchisedeck which is not in the matter of the thing sacrificed but in the Order and Calling of the persons sacrificing which is proved again plainely in this that Christ is a Priest for ever after that Order of Melchisedeck For if this Order were and did consist in the pretended sacrfice of the Masse Then it would follow that Christ should not be a Priest for ever seeing the Masse shall not endure for ever Therefore Even as the same Melchisedeck was not head of any Order of Priesthood but onely a Priest after his own Order under the Law So Christ the onely Priest under the Evangelical Law needeth not to have a company of Priests sacrificing expiatorily and therefore that infinite number of Sacrificers established in the Church of Rome for to sacrifice againe our Lord Jesus Christ to God his Father standes convinced of having no calling Seeing they have intruded themselves into that Office without any commandment from God taking unto themselves in so doing the honour which belongeth to none but to our Lord and Saviour it not belonging at all unto the crature to sacrifice the Creator or for men sinners to sacrifice the Lambe without sin CHAP. XIII That S. Peter was not established by Christ head of the Universal Church and Prince of the Apostles and Consequently that the Pope who challengeth this Title but as S. Peters successor hath intruded himselfe into that office without any lawfull calling and sheweth himselfe to be Antichrist in doing quite contrary to that which Christ and S. Peter did TO be short It seemeth that our Adversaries wil be Christians no longer having not only forsaken the Doctrin but the very name also for to take the name of Catholicks God in his Justice would not suffer that they should retain the name which belongeth onely to true Christians that follow his word and trust in his promises For to be a true Christian it is not enough to beleeve onely that there is a Christ but we must rely on his promises and receive him such as he was given unto us of the Father that is for our salvation righteousnesse and satisfaction for our sinnes But our Adversaries doe not receive him so seeing they have established their righteousnesse in their own works by which they thinke to deserve the kingdome of God They will say indeed that his blood shed upon the Crosse is our Purgatory but they doe establish another in an Imaginary fire They say that the sacrifice he made upon the Crosse hath taken away our sinnes but they have established another sacrifice to blot them away againe and all against the Word of God Therefore they cannot boast that they are Christians but rather Antichristians that have rejected the true Doctrine for to embrace and follow the Doctrine of the Pope of Rome who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped So that he as God sitteth in the Temple of God shewing himselfe that he is God 2. Thes. 2. 4. But for as much as the Popes Disciples do cloak this mystery of iniquity with some places of Scripture wherby they pretend to prove that S. Peter was established Head of the Universall Church and Prince of the Apostles because they would maintaine the Pope who by cunning hath intruded himself into that office I wil shew in few words that Saint Peter was not Prince of the Apostles nor head of the Universall Church as they say In the first place the Word of God tels us That our Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of his Church God hath put all things saith S. Paul under his feet and gave him to be the head over all things to the Church which is his body Again He is the head of the body the Church who is the beginning the first born from the dead that in all things he might have the preeminence Ephes. 1. 22. 23. Colos. 1. 18. By these places it appeares that S. Peter was not Head of the Church For Shee which is but one body cannot have two heads And it is to no purpose to say that Christ is the essential head but that S. Peter was the Ministeriall