Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sin_n	grace_n	receive_v	remission_n	3,574	5	9.3483	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A80553	A vindication of the magistrates and ministers of the city of Gloucester, from the calumnies of Mr. Robert Bacon, in his printed relation of his usage there, which he intitles, The spirit of prelacy yet working, or truth from under a cloud. Together with ten questions discussed, which tend to the discovery of close antinomianisme. / By John Corbet minister, and chaplain to Major generall Massie. Published by authority.	Corbet, John, 1620-1680.; Nicanor, Lysimachus, 1603-1641,	1646 (1646)	Wing C6267B; Thomason E337_15; ESTC R200828	24,213	37

Saints humiliation to arise from the sight of the glory of God where as now he saith godly sorrow is required in case of sin How can he reconcile this contradiction We hold that the soul is graciously humbled in the sight of sin together with the reflection of the glory of God Which the Text in Isa 6. would have cleared unto him had he took in the latter part viz. I am undone I am a man of unclean lips and dwell amongst a people of unclean lips Now let it be well considered whether this be to handle Gods Word sincerely Qu. 7. Whether Confession of sin i. of ur originall corruption and sinfull actions reckoning them before the Lord be required in a Christian Aff. according to M. B. HEre we agree in the tearms at least but in the stating of the Question I shall briefly observe some impertinencies and so passe on First that Hypocrites are wont to confesse their sinfull actions but not their sinfulnesse the Saints confesse not onely their sinfull Actions but their sinfulnesse Now by sinfulnesse he doth understand their unclean natures But know we not that Hypocrites as well as the Saints confesse their sinfull natures as their sinfull actions and in this they differ that the one confesse both these in hypocrisie the other confesse both in sinceritie 2. He addeth The Confession of the Saints is grounded upon the knowledge of Gods love in Christ but the confession of the Hypocrites upon some other information Ans Is not the Confession of the Saints grounded also upon the knowledge of sin and of the glory and holinesse of the Lord as upon the knowledge of Gods love in Christ Is there any difference between them and Hypocrites in this point but that they confesse upon all the former considerations with sinceritie and resolution of amendment of wayes but Hypocrites upon the same considerations do not confesse from the bottome of their hearts and with a full purpose of Amendment Qu. 8. Whether you hold communion with the Church of England i. in our Parochiall Assemblies to be lawfull Neg. according to Mr. B. IN this we differ First against Mr. Bacon I reply that this Question is not a matter properly concerning discipline except matters of discipline can deny Communion in the worship and ordinances of Christ Also the defects of Reformation is no ground of Separation 2 A supposition of the people 's not having repented them of their false worship is no ground of separation 3 That he shall communicate with any people in any Assembly so far as reformed according to the Word of God is no determinate answer 4 His Collection from this Question That every Parish should bear the name of the Church of England is very absurd Because we speak of a Church in Parochiall Assemblies as the whole in it's parts must every part bear the name of that whole 5 That the Church of England doth cease because discipline is for a while suspended is a conclusion not worth the refuting 6 To understand by the Church of England all of all Conditions that have indeed faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ and so are of the Church in the eye of God and are of a sutable conversation towards men in practice is to give a character of a great part of the invisible Church Christs mysticall body to a particular constituted Church What more confused notions then these Qu. 9. Whether Repentance be necessarie to the Remission of sins Neg. according to Mr. B. HErein we dissent We understand Evangelicall Repentance and that so necessarie as that God will never forgive our sins untill we repent Mr. Bacon is very subtle in remarking the particle To. I cannot understand but a thing that is necessarie in any determinate case must be necessarie to that thing But he is afraid that this same To would bring in Repentance as something actually existent for so I conceive him before the Remission of sins But this follows no more then that we must bring faith to God before the Act of Justification But if he will say that we are justified by faith and yet that faith is not necessarie to Justification I must confesse his subtilties are beyond my comprehension 1 For that charge of bordering nigh unto if not agreeing with that of Bellarmine who affirms that Repentance is a way to faith and justification in the remission of sins If he understand it according to Bellarmine in the way of a previous disposition I utterly disclaim it Neither can it be collected from the Doctrine of Repentance as necessarie to the Remission of sins And this answers the next Objection that we make Repentance to go before the Remission of sins I give this Instance to have a reasonable soul is necessarie to the being of a man doth it therefore follow that a reasonable soul is before that being We say that Repentance and Remission are coexistent For at the same instant when God doth forgive sin he confers the grace of Repentance that the soul might be capable of receiving forgivenesse Act. 3.19 Repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out Whereas Mr. Bacon will have Remission of sins to go before Repentance in order of nature He cannot reduce it to either of those two wayes mentioned by Aristotle After one way that is said to be first in nature from which the consequence doth not return to some other thing from whence the consequence is drawn to that former To instance one is in nature before two For suppose two and one is presupposed but suppose one two doth follow Therfore that is said to be first in nature à quo non retro sequitur consequendi ratio Now in this manner Remission of sins cannot be before Repentance in order of nature for then upon the supposal of Remission Repentance doth not follow The second way is in respect of causality But remission is not the cause of repentance Besides it should be said your sins are forgiven you that you might repent and not repent that your sins might be forgiven Wherefore Remission of sins doth require Repentance as a means absolutely necessarie and that not pre-existent but coexistent Qu. 10. Whether there be a reall change in the person that is saved Aff. according to Mr. B. VVE agree in the tearms of the Question but we have no satisfaction therein Truth is we were too short in the manner of propounding we understood a reall change not in opposition to intentionall onely but to a relative change also and that none onely a change of condition but of nature Such a change Mr. Bacon did never publickly clear among us And in the close of this Dispute he did peremptorily refuse to declare whether there were in a beleever the habits of grace and inherent holinesse FINIS

Christ Still from the purpuse Secondly those that without Christ doe nothing truely and sincerely which is contained in the Law 7. The Law is exceeding usefull to take men off from the damnable opinion of their owne righteousnesse This doth neither declare that a Christian ought to humble his soule by reflecting up the holy Law of an holy and jealous God nor that he is bound to the Law as a Rule 8. The Law in the Hand of a Mediator is a rule of life for what the Law doth command in the letter that the law of the spirit of life doth worke within which is therefore called the Law of Faith or the Law of Christ or the Law written in the heart Here he seems to speak somthing but all darke and confused The Law in it selfe and not as considered in the hand of a Mediator is the rule of life But the Law given in the hand of a Mediator doth shew that the exact righteousnesse thereof is not required unto justification Secondly he brings a reason which hath no connexion in these words For what the Law doth command in the letter without the law of the spirit doth worke within except he doth meane because the Gospell inableth the Law bindeth Is this to state a Controverted question Might not an Antinomian grant these positions if he would study to conceale himselfe Besides at the Dispute he did reject this Conclusion viz. That the Law doth bind a Christian to obedience for said he the Gospell doth inable him Which the understanding hearers remember I doubt not that I refuted by replying that t is the nature of a Law to binde and where the Law bindes not there is no sin Have we not reason to suspect unsoundnesse in this Point And as there is a distinction made between seperation and semi-seperation so t is necessary to distinguish between grosse and close Antinomianisme Q. 2. Whether good Workes be a meanes to obtain Salvation Neg. according to Master B. HErein we differ But this question was at first proposed in other tearmes Whether good Works may be called a Way to Salvation which Master Bacon had formerly denyed to my selfe and another Minister and at the first Conference more publikly disclaymed the distinction of Via ad Regnum and Causa Regnandi affirming that Jesus Christ is the onely way Whereas we meane by a way such a course as God hath appointed them to take whom he will bring to salvation without which salvation doth not ensue As the narrow way in the Gospell and the undefiled in the way Psal 119. And by good workes we declared to understand not onely the fruits but the principles of holinesse namely inherent grace But to indulge our adversary in an expression the Question was thus propounded Whether good Workes be a meanes to obtaine Salvation By which we understand not the onely or the chiefest meanes for I then declared in my Paper that Christ alone by his super-abounding merit hath purchased salvation for us and now further adde that according to his pleasure he dispenseth his grace and by his power preserveth his people to eternall life But holinesse is so necessary that if supposing an impossibility a man might be justified and not sanctified he could never appeare before the face of God in glory But this expression is rejected as unsavoury whereas a meanes doth imply no more then something aptly disposed and designed to a certain end Thus Gods Ordinances are a means to obtain salvation But holinesse is absolutely necessary follow peace with all men and holinesse without which no man shal see the Lord. But the word obtaine is most remarked which is the Scripture phrase 1 Cor. 9.24 So run that ye may obtaine Consider other places Phil. 2.12 Worke out your salvation with feare and trembling Phil. 3.14 it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reward of victory 2 Cor. 4.17 our light affliction which is but for a moment worketh out for us a far more exceeding weight of glory That holinesse is a way to salvation is cleerly proved out of the Text which Master Bacon urgeth Ephes 2.10 Wee are created in Christ Jesus unto good workes which God hath ordained that we should walke therein for if we walke in them they are a way if a way there must terminus ad quem the end of our walking which is salvation But saith he to affirme that good workes are a meanes to obtaine salvation is to deny Christ the onely meanes I answer Christ is the onely meanes meritorious and the onely meanes principally efficient but this doth not exclude other means subordinate unto Christ as the Word and Sacraments and such things as flow from Christ by inevitable consequence as good workes being ranked in their own place Q. 3. Whether God be displeased with his people that are in Christ for their sinnes we meane such a people as are in the Covenant of Grace Neg. according to Master B. HEre we differ in opinion but this question was at first propounded in other tearms viz. Whether God be displeased with the sinnes of his people which Master Bacon affirmed Whereupon we urged his owne Doctrine publickly taught in these words You know that when we please men they will be pleased with us when we offend them they will bee offended with us they are up and downe but farre be it from us to entertaine such thoughts of God whom he loveth he loveth to the end he is not as man to be displeased the Lord help us that we rather consider that we are not sinners so much because of the acts of sinne but rather because of the sinfulnesse of sinne It is true to the naturall man to our understandings God is pleased with us this houre and not that houre but you must come up higher to the knowledge of God that he is the same to day and for ever Here he plainly denies the pleasure or displeasure of God for this or or that act and hereupon he brought forth this subtilty That God is displeased with the sinnes of his people but not with his people for sinne of which people he exacted so much explanation as that they are in Christ as if we conceived Gods people out of Christ but this is not enough he exacts more viz. we meane such a people as are in the Covenant of grace as if it were possible to conceive that Gods people which are in Christ are out of the Covenant of grace He states the Question on this wise 1 When we affirme that God is displeased or angry we speak after the manner of men for God is not subject to passion Answ to say that God is angry is spoken after the manner of men yet dispeasure is no passion but agrees with God in the highest perfection of his nature for God is equally perfect in the dislike of sinne as in the love of good 2. When we are chastened of the Lord 't is a signe of his love not of his displeasure