Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sin_n	dead_a	death_n	trespass_n	4,131	5	10.6204	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85957	The fort-royal of Christianity defended. Or, a demonstration of the divinity of scripture, by way of excellency called the Bible. With a discussion of some of the great controversies in religion, about universal redemption, free-will, original sin, &c. For the establishing of Christians in truth in these atheistical trying times. / By Thomas Gery, B.D. and Rector of Barwell in Leicestershire.	Gery, Thomas, d. 1670?	1657 (1657)	Wing G618; Thomason E1702_1; ESTC R209377	93,977	264

of doing them or leaving them undone be understood with this caution so far forth as God shall be pleased to afford both the concurrence of his general and divine providence which enableth all creatures to motion and action and the concurrence of his common restraining grace which in some measure more or lesse he affordeth promiscuously to all sorts of men both regenerate and unregenerate Thus far an unregenerate man is able to move and bend himself toward the work of his conversion by the natural liberty of his will About the second namely How far forth mans will co●perates with God in his couversion I will first rehearse the Adversaries assertion amongst which the Papists are chief and leaders to the rest and then the assertion of the Reformed Churches The Papists say That the will of man before regeneration can by the help of the exciting grace of God though not without it as Pelugius said will its own conversion and either accept or reject God's grace of internal vocation and so cooperates with the grace of God in the first act of conversion So teacheth the Councel of Trent and Bellarmine in his book de gratia libero Arbitr lib. 6. cap. 15. This opinion the Reformed Churches disrellish and reject as dissenting from holy Scripture and assert the point thus That the will of man is a meer patient and not agent at all in the first act of conversion and God's grace is the sole efficient cause thereof and the will but subjectum recipiens the subject receiving the grace of conversion But in all other good acts following the first mans will so renewed cooperates with the grace of God And this was the learned S. Augustine his assertion as it 's expressed in the 17. chap. of his book de gratia libero arbit in these words Vt velimus Deus sine nobis operatur quum autem volumus sic volumus ut faciamus nobiscum cooperatur To will God works without us but when we do will and so will that we act God co-works with us That this latter assertion is the truth I shall make it appear by these three Arguments The first Argument AS is a dead man in his Revivification or Restauration to life so is a natural man to his Regeneration or Conversion which is his Restauration to spiritual life But a dead-man can be no cause of his own Revivification or Restauration to life And therefore a natural man can be no cause of his Regeneration or Restauration to spiritual life The assumption no man that hath reason can deny for there is an impossibility that a dead man should cooperate to his own Revivification The major or first Proposition is justified by those many Texts of Scripture where it 's affirmed of men unregenerate that they are dead in sin as Luke 9.60 Let the dead bury their dead id est The dead in sin their bodily dead And Luke 15.24 This my Son was dead id est in sin And Ephes 2.1 You hath he quickned who were dead in trespasses and sins And Col. 2.13 And you being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickned together with him having forgiven you all trespasses And this very argument though not in the same words yet to the same purpose and effect Bellarmine useth against the Pelagians in his Lib. 6. cap. 5. De gratta Libero Arb. adding only this clause to the Assumption That a dead man neither doth nor can dispose himself to life unlesse he receives some vital power from him that revives him which it appears he therefore added lest the argument should reflect and so be retorted upon himself who afterwards in the 10. Chapter of the same book attributes power to mans will to work with God in his first conversion the will being but first aided and excited by the preventing grace of God by which he means as it 's there very evident a grace preceding the work of conversion But that the argument which he there useth against Pelagius doth confute himself in that the clause which he hath added to the Assumption doth not turn away the edge of the argument from himself I make it plain thus A dead man can receive no vital power from him that revives him till he have first received soul and life because there can be no vital power but in a living subject it being a proper adjunct of a living subject quarto modo If then he must receive soul and life before he can have any vital power then cannot his vital power cooperate to his revivification but must of necessity be a consequent and an effect of his enlivening And so in like manner the case is the same with a man spiritually dead He must first be revived by God before he can have any vital power in him to work with the grace of God and therefore can be no cause at all of his revivification and conversion in respect of the first act thereof The second Argument IF all the powers of mans soul be so depraved that even the chiefest of them namely his Wisedom a power consisting both in the understanding and will be opposite to the Will of God and the Law of God and so opposite that it cannot be made conformable and subject to the Law of God while it is the wisedom of the flesh that is till it be renewed and changed from fleshly wisedom to spiritual wisedom then can there be no power in mans will whereby to co-work with God in the first act of his conversion But all the power and faculties of mans soul are depraved c. Therefore there can be no power in mans Will to co-work with God in the first act of his Conversion The consequent in the first Proposition is clear to any intelligent person for if the wisedom of the flesh which leads and guides the Will cannot conform and be subject to the Law of God while it is the wisedom of the flesh then cannot the will which is guided by it cooperate with the will of God while it is the will of the flesh and therefore by undeniable consequence must be renewed before it can cooperate with his will And the Assumption is the expresse affirmation of Scripture Gen. 6.5 Every imagination of the thoughts of mans heart is only evill continually And Rom. 8.7 The wisedom of the flesh is enmity against God for it is not subject unto the Law of God neither indeed can be The third Argument MY third Argument shall be the quotation of those many Texts of Scripture where the co-operation of mans Will with God's Grace in the first work of regeneration is clearly excluded and the work attributed to God alone For brevitie sake I will quote but some of the clearest and most convincing proofs and omit the rest which are very numerous John 1.13 The Spirit of God speaking there of regenerate persons affirmeth that they are born not of bloud nor of

death of the body for as the soule gives naturall life to the body so the image of God namely righteousnesse and holinesse gives spirituall life to the soule and without which the soul is spiritually dead as Ephes 2.1 Colos 2.13 and divers other Texts of Scripture witnesse where mention is made of a death in sin You that were dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickened c. whence by undeniable consequence it follows that where there is a deprivation of the spiritual life of righteousnesse and holinesse there must needs follow a spiritual death in sin Now if they deny grace righteousnesse and holinesse to be the life of the soul I refer them to the view of these three Texts of Scripture omitting many other where it 's expreslly asserted Prov. 3.21 22. Keep sound wisedom and discretion so shall they be life unto thy soul And Rom. 8.6 To be carnally minded is death but to be spiritually minded is life And Rom. 8.10 The spirit is life because of righteousness that is The soul is alive spiritually because of righteousnesse Argument 3. THey whom Christ came to save are sinners So saith our Saviour himself Matth. 9.13 I came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance And S. Paul Rom. 5.6 Christ died for the ungodly And 1 Tim. 1.15 Christ Jesus came into the World to save sinners And this must needs be so in reason for where there is no sin there is no need of a Saviour But Christ came to save Infants as well as men of years Therefore they are sinners Now that Christ came to save Infants as well as men of years appears by Scripture these two ways 1. Because he died for all men as oft the Scripture affirms 1 Tim. 2.6 He gave himself a ransome for all Heb. 2.9 He tasted death for every man For whether all in these and the like Texts of Scripture be taken for all sorts of men only or for all of all sorts Infants must needs be included amongst them for they are one sort of men 2. Because he invited children to come unto him or to be brought unto him as is said Marke 10.14 which intimates that he came into the world to save them as well as men of years I will add one argument more for proof of this point to which the wit of man though prompted by the cunning suggestion of the old serpent cannot devise a satisfactory answer Argument 4. THey which are by nature children of wrath are by nature sinners But all men are by nature children of wrath so saith the Apostle Ephes 2.3 Therefore all men are by nature sinners and so consequently Infants The first proposition is all that I have to prove for the assumption is S. Paul's own affirmation And I find it the constant doctrine of holy Scripture both in the Old and New Testament which evermore teacheth sin to be the only cause of God's anger and wrath And this in reason must needs be so because all things else were his own works which were all good yea very good as we read in Gen. 1.31 And sin only was the Divel's work the enemy of God and all goodnesse and therefore sin only is said to provoke God's anger and wrath The testimonies of Scripture are so numerous for this that I will name but this one of a thomsand Rom. 1.18 The wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousnesse of men And how oft God is said in Scripture to have been provoked to anger by the sins of the people of Israel none can be ignorant I will add but one thing more about this argument and so I will conclude it The forenamed Text in Eph. 2.3 with what is deducible from it where it is affirmed that we are all by nature the children of wrath puzleth the Anabaptists not a little and puts them to their shifts to frame such an exposition thereof as may not impugn their own false Tenet about original sin This may appear from that exposition which the forementioned Mr. Brown hath made of that Text in the 6. page of his book that I named before where he thus expounds it By nature saith he is understood first the matter and form of our bodies which are good and principally the light that God hath placed in man Now that this is a novel false and irrational interpretation of this Text I thus discover If by nature here be understood nothing but what is good namely the matter and form of our bodies and the light that God hath placed in us then how can it make us the children of wrath as here it 's said of it for nothing that 's good can make us children of wrath It 's sin only which was first brought forth by Satan and nothing else that provokes God's wrath as formerly was proved By nature therefore in this place of necessity must be understood something that is sinful for else it could not make us children of wrath as hath been shewed which can be nothing else but that vitiosity pravity and corrupt disposition which from our first birth and being is propagated into our bodies and souls by natural generation For though it were granted that by nature here be meant the substance of our souls and bodies yet of necessity it must be also granted as hath been now proved that it 's meant of them not as pure and free from any sin but as vitiated and depraved therewith from their first union and conjunction together into one individual It remains therefore a sure and sacred truth inviolable and infringible and not to be contradicted but by obstinacy or impudence it self That children are born in sin The sixth Controversie About Tithes THere is an obsteperous clamour raised against Tithes by the Anabaptistical teachers who yet for the most part lay as heavy a burthen upon their disciples and put them to as great cost and charges as is equivalent to Tithes And this in all probability they have broached and ventilated to get the better morsel for themselves For this they find by experience that the way to insinuate with the common people and to winde themselves into their bosomes is to preach pleasing things unto them and especially such as sound for their profit be it right or wrong To stop their mouths if it may be if not yet to justifie the practise of paying and receiving Tithes I will first make it appear that it stands with equity and justice that Ministers of the Gospel have allowance and recompence for performing their work of the Ministery and such an allowance as may afford them a competent and comfortable livelihood and subsistence Secondly I shall make it appear That it stands with equity and justice that they have Tithes for their allowance 1. The former I shall prove both by Scripture and force of reason By Scripture I shall prove it both in the Old Testament and in the New First

it It will be expedient for me to premise certain Theological conclusions or principles which all Orthodox Divines unanimously and univocally have acknowledged to be undoubted Truths as Praecognita and Canons to have recourse unto for the decision and determination of any Controversie as need shall require which if they deny to assent unto they are not to be disputed with as the proverb speaks Contra negantem principia non est disputandum There 's no disputation to be held with him that will deny the principles of Art The Principles I think fit to premise are these four 1. That the Canonical Scripture is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is authentical and creditable of it self 2. That there is no contradictions in the Canonical Scripture 3. That the same makes and so by consequence alloweth to be made distinction between things that sometime in Scripture have the same denomination This appears by many instances in Scripture whereof I will name these three Fear Faith and Sorrow First About Fear the Scripture mentioneth a fear which is gracious and godly which the learned have termed Filial and a Fear which is gracelesse which the learned have termed Servile of this we have an example in 2 Kings 17.33 34. where it 's said of the Babylonians in the former verse that they feared God and then in the latter verse that they feared him not Whence it 's evident that a distinction must be made of the fear of God whereof some is a Gracious Fear and some a Gracelesse otherwise there would be a contradiction between the two verses which Scripture admits not Secondly About Faith The Scripture doth distinguish it into these two sorts namely a Faith that hath Works and a Faith that is without works which it also calleth a dead faith James 2.17 Faith if it have no Works is dead being alone Thirdly About Sorrow The Scripture speaks of a godly sorrow for sin and a worldly sorrow in 2 Cor. 7.10 Godly sorrow worketh Repentance to salvation but the sorrow of the World worketh death Hereby it 's clear that a distinction is sometimes to be made betwixt things that have the same denomination The fourth Principle which I shall premise is this That seeming contradictions in Scripture are so to be expounded by help of other Texts either speaking of the same point or otherwise that they may symphonize and accord together Which help the Scripture affords in one place or other If our Adversaries will yield to be tryed about the forementioned Controversies by these old Canons which have been universally received for undoubted truths by all Christian Churches in primitive times when the waters ran clearest from under the Threshold of the Sanctuary I shall adventure to bear the disgrace if I do not convince them of error about each Controversie that I have before named The first Controversie handled About Election THeir first Error that I shall undertake to confute is their assertion That God's election of men unto salvation is grounded upon his foresight of their Faith and Obedience or sanctification and Good Works That is that he electeth such and such men to life and salvation because he foreseeth that they will believe and walk in obedience to his Commandements This Assertion I shall prove to be an error by these four Arguments The first Argument If men shall therefore believe because they are elected and ordained to eternal life then they are not elected and ordained to eternal life because they will believe This consequence cannot be denied by any intelligent man But men shall therefore believe because they are elected and ordained to eternal life and therefore are not elected and ordained to it because they will believe The Assumption I prove out of Acts 13.48 where it 's said That as many as were ordained to eternall life believed Here Faith is made the fruit and effect of election to eternal life and therefore cannot be the cause of it for nothing can be the cause and effect too of one and the same thing My second Argument is this If men be elected or chosen that they may be holy then their election must needs be the ground and cause of their holinesse and sanctification But men are elected that they may be holy so saith the Scripture Ephes 1.4 He hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the World that we should be holy and without blame before him in love Therefore Election is the ground and cause of holinesse or sanctification and not holinesse the ground and cause of election The third Argument If the good pleasure of God's will be the ground and first cause of mens election and predestination to salvation then God's fore-sight of their Sanctification and Good Works cannot be the first cause and ground thereof This consequence is undeniable But the good pleasure of God's will is the first cause and ground of mens election and predestination to salvation Therefore God's fore-sight of their sanctification and Good Works cannot be the first cause and ground thereof The A sumption I prove from these two Texts of Scripture passing by many other to the same purpose Rom. 9.11 S. Paul there affirms That the purpose of God according to Election stands not of Works but of him that calleth Where works are denied and Gods will affirmed to be the cause of election And Ephes 1.5 and again verse 11. the good pleasure of God's will is made the ground and cause of mens election to salvation The words in the fift verse are these Having predestinated us to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ unto himself according to the good pleasure of his will And the words in the 11. verse are these In whom also we have obtained an inheritance being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the councel of his own will If the Adversaries answer that Election may be according to the good pleasure of God's will and yet the good pleasure of his will may not be the cause of Election To this I reply That the Apostle makes it plain in the 11. verse that he speaks of the good pleasure of God's will as the cause of Election by the addition of these last words in the verse Who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will For if he worketh all things after the counsel of his own will then Election is necessarily one of those things which he worketh after the councel of his own will and therefore the counsell of his own will must needs be the cause thereof The fourth Argument is this If Good Works be no causes of salvation then neither of election unto salvation this is plain because Election is the cause of Salvation But Good Works are no causes of salvation and therefore no causes of Election The minor Proposition or Assumption is proved by Ephes 2.8 9 verses where the Apostle saith By grace ye are saved through faith and that not of your selves it is the