Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sin_n	death_n	die_v	original_a	3,313	5	9.0307	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A23636	The principles of the Protestant religion maintained, and churches of New-England, in the profession and exercise thereof defended against all the calumnies of one George Keith, a Quaker, in a book lately published at Pensilvania, to undermine them both / by the ministers of the Gospel in Boston.	Mather, Cotton, 1663-1728.; Allen, James, 1632-1710.	1690 (1690)	Wing A1029; ESTC W19401	72,664	176

Possibility of Holiness Holiness is scarce sense and to acknowledge a capacity of Holiness but in some and yet but one page before to plead a possibility of Conversion in all would have been a Contradicting himself if it had not been G. K. Sect. 7. We have G. K. here speaking the Scripture fair The Scripture is a rich treasure and he is for Scripture Words and it is not safe to leave them and what is all this for why the Scripture indeed acknowledgeth all to be born in sin but what then Why the seed or principle of sin and Corruption is but it is not imputed till men join their Consent to it and actually obey it and it s as clear as midnight from Rom. 5.13 and thus he interprets it The time of Infancy is the time wherein there is no Law and therefore tho children are dead in law there is no imputation Excellently well expounded Paul is there proving that there was a law antecedent to the edition of the law of Moses and his argument is because there was sin in the world before and that it is imputed he might have found if he had read the following verse for there we find the sentence executed which necessarily presupposeth imputation nay the very calling it Sin is a charge or imputation and a supposition of a Law condeming men for it nor do his many Citations at all prove that none dye and finally perish for the first sin but for actual sins of their own which was now to be proved for they only intimate that all mens actions are liable to the Judgement and shall be tried and sentenced but deny not that man's state in Adam shall be so too Because the Scripture saith that men shall perish for actual sin doth it thence follow that men shall not so for original sin But the knack is they died in Adam and Christ by His death for all that died in Adam hath dischared all of that Imputation which is a perfectly Arminian principle and hath bin enough confuted by all that have written against them That therefore he concludes that none do suffer final Destruction but for Rejecting the Physitian makes the condition of Pagans better than that of Christians for these are certain to escape destruction being incapable of rejecting the Physitian who is never offered to them whereas Millions of those do reject Him and perish for it The Gospel then opens a door to man's Undoing which else he had been out of the danger of if Christ had but died for us and never told us of it His wild Assertion p. 91. That all the children of Adam and Noah have a foederal Holiness i. e. a seed of holiness in them i. e. a capacity of being made holy not to call the Coherence of it in question seems to contradict the Apostle who 1. Cor 7.14 assures us that Unbeleevers children are unclean i. e. not holy and he there treats directly about foederal holiness He concludes this Paragraph and Chapter with two Insinuations how true let any judge 1. That Grace is propagated by our natural parents how this is it may be he will tell us next time 2. That there is habitual Sanctification in all men by nature As to the first David was of another mind Psal 51.5 For the latter Paul was not acquainted with this principle Rom. 7.18 But he speaks as yet but in the clouds we shall have him a little more open in the next Chapter Reflections on Cap. 6. of Christ's dying for all c. In this Chapter he proceeds more particularly to urge and maintain the Doctrine of Vniversal Redemption and we might dismiss him for his Answer to the writitings of the Anti-Remonstrants but because many may not be advantaged with those discourses we shall make a few brief Remarks upon his Absurdities Sect. 1. His first and main plea is from the words of Scripture which express it in Universal terms viz All all men every man the world the whole world as for that of the Body Eph. 5.23 Paul himself there interprets it of the Church and its strange that the World and the Church should be of equal extent some of ours whom he calls the Adversaries of Truth have answered though it is not our whole Answer that by All is not meant all particulars i. e. Individuals but some of all sorts all the Elect. His Reply is that the word All must needs be as full and universal with respect to Christ's death and the benefit of it as it is with respect to Adam 's Fall and who denies it But it is not so in his sense except he will plead for universal Salvation as well as Redemption else the benefit is not parallel to the damage and so he indeed seems to plead by Citing 1. Tim. 4.10 for the proof of his Assertion but yet this he afterwards denies We are here to consider that Adam Christ are in Scripture made parallel in many Respects as Adam is a common Head so is Christ hence as Adam hath a natural seed so hath Christ a spiritual seed as Adam ruined all his seed so Christ Redeemed all His as Adam's seed are called the world because they comprize all the men and women coming into the world by natural Generation so Christ's Seed are called the world because they comprize all the men and women that belong to the world to come But then we must remember that Christ's Seed are a number selected out of the other and therefore though they are all because He loseth none of His Elect yet not all the Individuals of Adam's posterity for there are they of whom Christ saith They are none of my sheep Nor doth he interpret but pervert that in 2. Cor. 5.14 If one died for all then were all dead for the Apostles intention there is to prove that all God's Elect were dead because Christ died for them all The word All therefore doth not signifie some but all that come under that denomination Sect. 2. Whereas Christ Joh. 17.9 makes a Difference between His Redeemed and the world and saith I pray not for the world he would perswade us that world is there meant of final Impenitents or such as have finally rejected the meanes of Grace and with whom the Spirit hath ceased to strive But not to call over what hath been already offered Viz. That all have not the meanes of Grace and therefore cannot resist them it is plain that he excludes only the damned from Christ's prayer and hence he inferrs that Christ died only for their sins past Well then He died for those sins and prayed for those men he then owns His death and prayer to be lost and His Redemption void Did Christ dye to condemn men or to save ' em see Joh. 3.17 why then are they not saved for whom He came to dye Was He not able to draw them to Him or to save them that come to the uttermost That he saith Many are guilty of final

fall yet he shall rise again Nor will God suffer them to dy before He hath recovered them Neither yet doth our Doctrine encourage to any hope of such who so defile themselves and dy without Repentance I●●s therefore a vile Aspersion to call our Doctrine Poisonous We believe that sin of its own nature kills the sinner that its wages is death that the soul that sins shall d● but w● believe that he may dy in his surety that God can pardon and justifie him for Christ's sake and that if He doth He will sanctifie him too and what poison is there in all this the foundation of a sinners hope is laid in this and but for this hope the least sin of thought is mortal all the gall therefore that he vents in these three pages hurts us not being meer false Aspersions or deceitful insinuations and doth not he himself say that if God suffers those whom he hath drawn at any time to depart they shall certainly be reclaimed p. 46. nay that they shall infallibly be called at last glorified p. 76. Nor could he have said that this makes God a respecter of persons in the worst sense if he had not been ignorant o● what that Respect of persons is there is no respect of persons in gratuitis for that i● only when Justice is perverted for some sinister consideration the owner may do ●it● his own what he will Besides there is in the bestowing of the Recompence of glory a vas● difference between them that receive it an● such as miss of it Mat. 25 tho' still it's Go● that makes them to differ Sect. 2. That God hath laid duty upon H● people to use endeavours for their standin● we deny not but constantly urge but th● alwaies where the promise of preserving 'em in faith is mentioned this condition is understood is warily to be taken up if he intends that God will keep them by fulfilling the Condition in them it hurts us not but if he mean that the promise depends on our performing the condition and so is meerly Hypothetical it s an errour for it is certain that the very keeping of His people from utterly falling belongs to the promise of the New Covenant under which they are by Beleeving Psal 84.11 Jer. 32.40 Sect. 3. G. K. knowing that there were some Scriptures that did so fully assert the Perseverance of God's People that he could with no face deny the truth in them begins in this Paragraph to concede yet so as not to favour our principle at all who say that Its the priviledge of every true Beleever to persevere He therefore makes it a particular state of Holiness which only some of these arrive unto and then they commit no gross sins but only Peccadillo's and thus with the Papists he introduceth the distinction of mortal and venial sins which hath been sufficiently confuted by ours who have made it evident that all sins are mortal by the law Ezek. 18.4 That all sin excepting that against the Holy Ghost is venial by the Gospel Mat. 12.31 but when he comes to describe who these are that are thus indulged he wofully prevaricates In p. 46. he tells us they are 1. such as are born of the free woman and not of the bond woman Well this is not a peculiar priviledge of some but is common to all Believers even the Galatians who were so weak and foolish Cap. 4. ult 2. They are throughly renewed If by being throughly renewed he meanes so sanctified as to have no dreggs of sin remaining then there are no such for he grants of these he speaks of that they do commit little faults that must be because there is something of the old man in them If by throughly he meanes in all the parts then it belongs to every Beleever 2. Cor. 5.17 3. They are such as are born of God and that belongs to Faith where ever it is Gal. 3.36 Joh. 1.12 When he saith that those who commit any gross sins as Fornication Murder Adultery c. never arrived to to the pure state of sonship he doth 1. Mistake the notion of the difference between servants and sons true beleevers are both sons by Adoption servants by being devoted to the Obedience of the Gospel How often doth Paul call himself the servant of Jesus Christ and so does James Cap. 1.1 Peter 2. Ep. 1.1 Jude vers 1. It s true Paul distinguisheth between the outward servile Condition of Beleevers under the Old Testament Dispensation and the more free and son-like Condition of them under the New Testament Gal. 4. begin but he assures us that they were children tho' but in their Nonage 2. Contradict the Scripture David fell into some of those sins and the worst of them and yet before that he had the highest Testimony of his Sonship Solomon had his amazing falls and yet God witnessed before after that he was His son that He lov'd him called him Jedediah 2. Sam. 12.24 25. 1. Chron. 22.9 10. He seems in all this discourse to lay the stress upon the strength of Inherent Grace and the Beleevers own Attainment whereas the Scripture assures us that it is of God and depends upon His power Rom. 5.2.14.4 1. Pet. 5.12.1.5 and God hereby perfects strength in weakness 2. Cor. 12.9 In p. 147. he strangely confounds the two Covenants and yet really grants the whole Case He saith The first Covenant may be fal●en from the Angels and Adam fell totally but the new Covenant cannot be fallen from thus we say but the knack we were not aware of is a man may be a Believer and yet ●e but in Adam 's covenant than which there can be no greater Contradiction or a man may be in a middle state between both which is the greatest confusion or finally he will have none to be in the new Covenant till they come to Glory and then they shall sin no more and this is directly against Scripture Pag. 148. He saith There may be infallible marks and signs of such given and yet God only knows them and such to whom He reveals it We thought that Marks had been given purposely to know by but the Folly of this hath been already detected Sect. 4. We are now come to the Quakers Doctrine of Perfection of which they boast and here he first rails at ours that denyes it and then tries to prove his own tho' that very Essay will prove him to be very imperfect That the best Dutyes of the best Saints in this life are imperfect and that by reason of sinful mixtures in them and that daily the most holy come short of perfect legal Obedience might be charged with sin for their best if God should be strict we beleeve can appeal to the sensible complaints of holy men in Scripture but for him hence to infer that we say that the good works of God's Holy Spirit are defiled in by the saints and to print it in another

Character as our very words is cheating But how far our Duties are the work of the Spirit and how far they are our own has been already discussed It s he that makes the Chimaera and not we we never say that One the same thing is a perfect man a perfect dog We say that every Believer in this life hath a new nature an old in him a body of Grace a body of Corruption the one increasing the other decaying imperfect grace but growing a body of death but dying and he is as it were two men and so Paul distinguisheth of himself Rom. 7.15.17 Nor do we say that the work is totally perfect and totally sin but we say that the work it self is imperfect by reason that though it be influenced by grace it is also defiled by sin being done by one in whom there is both sin the Influence of it into his best performances Nor do we any whit misinterpret God when we say He accepts of these works in Christ tho they be defiled and if he shall say that we do therefore suppose that God accepts of the defilement that is in them he mistakes In all the gracious Actings of Gods people there is Imperfection now all moral Imperfection is defilement and God accepts of the sincerity pardons the imperfection and both in Christ And this indeed is the priviledge of the Covenant of Grace above that of works why else was the High-Priest to make an Attonement for the Sanctuary c. Lev. 16.33 but that the Services notwithstanding the pollutions but for which no attonement was needed might be acceptable and this was Typical No doubt but that God sees sin in whomsoever it is and where He sees it He condemns it but in respect of Imputation to the person He does not alwaies see it i. e. charge it Num. 23.21 and why but because CHRIST hath made Satisfaction and Attonement for it In his Examen of the Scriptures alledged by the Assembly he plays foul with them he first points to three places where he saies they speak of this matter Confess cap. 16. fect 5. Larger Catech. Q. 149. 89. tho' this last is on another subject Secondly he gathers up diverse matters in one endeavouring to express them in as harsh words sense as he can Thirdly in p. 155. 156. he gathers up the the whole and saith they expresly so word it in Q. 39. which is utterly false indeed he hath so worded it for them that there are two things Charged on them which they say not viz. 1. That that they must sin as long as they live as if there were a fatal necessity that God laid them under of so doing 2. That they are only free from sinning after death whereas they say At their death 3. he mischievously perverts the design of the Scriptures alledged by them All the Scriptures he animadverts upon are only those which they annex to Q. 49. omitting those added in the other places Let us observe There were two things they had to prove 1st That no man can in himself perfectly keep the law 2. Nor by the Grace of God and from these principles they infer these Conclusions That they daily break the Commands in thought word and deed and how pertinent these Scriptures are to prove these two Positions may be judged That Man cannot do it in himself one wou'd think that the description given of his natural state Rom. 3.9 c. Gen. 6.5 is sufficient to demonstrate That as to the latter he cannot do it by Grace received doth not intend that God cannot give them grace enough but that He doth not therefore their imperfect grace cannot attain it And surely that is suffiiently proved by such Scriptures as 1. tell us That in many things all do offend for which Jam. 3.2 Ezek. 7.20 2. That every Beleevers grace depends for its exercise upon the help of Christ without which they can do no gracious thing for which Joh. 15.5 And the Consectary is not forced if we consider that the Nature of man being so corrupt unregenerate men can do no other than daily break the Command that because Beleevers are renewed but in part and yet are active beings in thinking speaking doing there will be an Influence of remaining Corruption into these actions which will make 'em short-coming in point of the strictness of the Law and c●nsequently breakers of it In the other place cited Confess cap. 16. sect 5. they quote Isa 64.6 Joh. 5.17 Rom. 7.15 28. and certainly Paul had as much grace as any now can Pretend to As to his particular Reflections on the forecited Texts they are scarce worth minding What he observes on Jam. ● 2 is a mistake of what they brought it to prove and it doth prove against him the Imperfection of any in this life For that in Ezek. 7.20 his observation that the word is in the future makes against him intimating that they can do no other as long as they live and his putting it for the potential is precarious his applying it to the times of the Law which made nothing perfect is fond for they had the Gospel as well as we and were perfect in an Evangelical sense Gen. 6.9 Job 1.1 Psal 37.37 For that in Gen. 6.5 when he saith it only speakes of that generation of men so degenerate he errs it shews the natural state of man by the Fall and we have its Parallel after that generation was gone Gen. 8.21 Nor was Noah so perfect but that he was afterwards drunken For that Rom. 3.9 c. we grant it expresseth the natural state of men as they are not only generally but universally under the Law it was brought by the Assembly for that purpose nor is it any Contradiction to say Righteous men sin we must distinguish between such as are righteous legally and them that are so evangelically and between such as are free from the Dominion and them that are free from the presence of sin Sect. 5. When therefore he cites Rom. 3.18 to prove that Perfection because they are free from sin it will not do that is to be understood of freedom from the dominion of it see v. 14. And his Application of Ezek. 36.25 Jer. 33.33 is confused for want of distinguishing of what it there referred to Justification and what to Sanctification That Justification is perfect we acknowledge tho he before denied it that Sanctification is imperfect we plead tho he saith it is perfect Now the making them clean from all their filthiness belongs to Justification putting the Spirit in them giving them an heart of flesh c. belongs to Sanctification and this confirms them in perseverance for they shall not depart but doth not wholly deliver them from sin His plea for perfection from Matth. 11.29 because Christ's yoke is easy and from 1 Joh 5.3 the commands not being grievous is too far fetch 't we are to distinguish between

Legal and Evangelical Obedience the Gospel hath abated of the Law and provided strength for us to obey Evangelically and made the command grateful to our new nature and Christ's grace is sufficient for what he intends by it but what is that to the Power of exact performing the law in its latitude And it s his ignorance in the Gospel which transports him into the following blasphemy against God calling Him Cruel and Tyrannical and worse than Pharaoh his friends the Arminians do the like and why because He requires of some that which He gives them no ability to perform Had man had none in Adam it would have look't harder but since he had and wickedly lost it and cares not for having it agen shall God now lose His Glory because man hath by his own fault lost his power or must He otherwise be said to be cruel Certainly if we cannot see into the depth of His providence an Holy God is not thus to be treated by a vile worm Nor is it as he pretends injurious to mens pressing after perfection and his Similitudes to illustrate it by are fopperies and no way quadrate Death is but Catacrestically or worse said to heal all bodily diseases bu● Grace is then properly perfected and sin abolished and that is a great comfort that when we remove hence we shall sin no more the City we are going to lies beyond Death and the Grave so it is no discouragement that we cann't reach it in this world Heb. 13.14 Christ hath provided sufficiently to keep his people from sloth make them press to the mark Who of us ever said that if a man dy in his sins his faith shall save him tho he live and dy in his sins what 's this but to slander We say that Believers shall not dy in their sins but God will give them Repentance if at any time they fall and yet that they sin more or less till they dy we say GOD saith so too but it 's one thing to have Sin in us another thing to be in our Sins And when he saith pag. 159. That It is an ill sign that we plead so earnestly for sin We Demand Is a saying that we have sin in us which calls for our humbling and plying the work of mortification and going daily to Christ the fou●●tain a pleading for sin surely they that Cover and not they that Confess their sins are pleaders for it and then we are sure that sin never had such Attourneys as the Quakers Sect 6. Now for the positive proof of Perfection and he is at a loss how to define it or where to state it he seems to deny absolute or perfect Perfection yet challengeth as much as Christ or Adam ever had nay 2ndly He grants that It is not in all but in some and that not at first conversion but afterwards Nay 3dly He further conceives that It is not in the most perfect without Infirmity that must be in a moral sense and then there must be some sin and that is almost as much as we say Yea 4thly he yeilds all that we pretend to though he will not acknowledge it to be sin Viz. Motions to sin not only from the devil without but from the mortal part within and that is it which Paul often calls sin 〈◊〉 Rom. 7. and whereas 5thly he pleads tha● tho' it be yet it is not imputed that is another question It sufficeth that it is imputable and it is on Christs account that it is no● actually imputed and 6thly To wind u● the whole he comes to a fair acknowledgment that he pleads for no more perfection in saints than we do It is a Faithfulness to God in that degree of Grace and assistance that He affords according as he sees meet some more some less I but in them that have least it is safe dying for them in that state and all this we plead and preach for And now let any man judge how he hath gone thro and cleared the charges that he made against us in his blasphemous letter If to ly slander pervert Scripture magisterially dictate Haeresies is to be acknowledged for conviction we are gone to all intents and purposes Reflections on Cap. 9th of the Visible Church We have already seen what little Reason there is to indulge the Doctrine of Immedia●e Revelation Allow but a Quaker this Engine and he will do wonders with it beat down the foundations of many generations un-Church all Christendom make the Scriptur● to intend just contrary to what it speaks who shall question him if he tells us he sees all this in the Light hath it immediately revealed G. K. hath hitherto discharged this against the fundamental Articles of Salvation endeavouring to set GOD agains● Himself and shamm us out of our faith Nor hath he don● yet but will a fresh essay to remove all that is visible of Christianity 〈◊〉 the world and if he can blow up Churches take away Sacraments and wrest our Sabbat● out of our hands what would Beelzebub himself have desired more But the Church is built upon a Rock and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it Sect. 1. His first Essay is against the Church considered as visible and here he cavils at the description of the visible Church given by the Assembly Viz. That it consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true Religion together with their Children insinuating that we hold that nothing of grace or of the power of godliness is requis●●e to constitute a member of our visible Church but this is all Rail●ng not understanding what we mean by Visible nor what by Profession 1. It is the visible Church they speak of and he also after grants that there is such a thing and what is it that makes it visible it must be something that makes it discernible to others Here then observe 1. That there is inward Grace required absolutely to make any one a living member of Christ ●o of the church of the first-born 2. That this sincerity of heart is to give its evidence to others by an answerable life and conversation There is a confession of the mouth as well as a beleeving in the heart Rom. 10.9 3. These Fruits are they by which others are to judge of mens Sincerity and accordingly to declare them to be visible members of the Church this rule the Apostles themselves followed in their owning of men 4. That such a profession may be where sincerity is not and thus Hypocrites may belong to the visible Church there were such in the primitive times Simon Magus Demas those 1. Joh. 2.19 were such 5. There may be many Irregularities in the Conversation of such which yet do not presently unchurch them such there were in the Churches of Corinth Galatia 6. That when such are become scandalous there are Church censures appointed by Christ and these can be administred to none but under the