Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sin_n	justification_n	life_n	remission_n	3,372	5	9.5028	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A96468	Truth further defended, and William Penn vindicated; being a rejoynder to a book entitutled, A brief and modest reply, to Mr. Penn's tedious, scurrilous, and unchristian defence, against the bishop of Cork. Wherein that author's unfainess is detected, his arguments and objections are answered. / By T.W. and N.H.	Wight, Thomas, ca. 1640-1724.	1700 (1700)	Wing W2108; ESTC R204122	88,609	189

Atonement in his Blood And the like he hath done in what followed in the Apology which we shall presently shew But. first we shall set down the intire Words as they lye in that Apology which the Bp. pretends to cite and by which the Reader will see the Bp's great unfairness which were at first the Words of an Adversary one Jenner and cited by W. P. with other Articles thus Pag. 148. 5th That we deny Justification by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person for us wholly without us and therefore deny the Lord that Bought us To which W. P. gives his Adversary an Answer thus And indeed this we deny and boldly affirm it in the Name of the Lord to be the Doctrine of Devils and an Arm of the Sea of Coruption which does now deluge the whole World Upon this W. P. proceeds to vindicate his Negation first saying that his Friend and Partner G. W. in writing that Apology had already irrefutably considered the Doctrine of Justification and therefore he will not insist so much upon this Point as he had upon others and only adds some short Arguments by which he proves that Wicked and Ungodly Men while so are not in a state of Justification and Acceptance with God by the imputed Righetousness of Christ and confirms the same by several Scripture Arguments and then on the other hand shews that such only are truly justified who are obedient unto the Spirit of God by which they become the Children of God and bring forth fruits of Holiness and in confirmation hereof gives us these Scripture Texts Gal. 6. Ro. 8. Reve. 22. And after having shewn who are not and who are in a state of Justification and Acceptance with God he is so far from denying Justification by Christ that he owns ascribes and asserts the same alone to him which for the Readers satisfaction we shall cite his Words as they lie in that Apology following the above Arguments p. 149. thus We do believe in one holy God Almighty who is an Eternal Spirit the Creator of all things and in one Lord Jesus Christ his only Son and express Image of his substance who took upon him Flesh and was in the World and in Life Doctrine Miracles Death Resurection Ascention Mediation perfectly did and does continue to do the will of God to whose holy Life Power Mediation and Blood we only ascribe our Sanctification Justification Redemption and perfect Salvation Now Impartial Reader judg between the Bp. and W. P. whether W. P. did deny Justification by Christ as the Bp. would insinuate and whether the Bp. was led by a Christian Spirit while he dealt so very unfairly what if we say unjustly by W. P. in misrepresenting his Sense to make him so intend as we have before noted Now as to the Doctrine of Justification we shall not be large thereon in regard many of our Friends have treated upon that head and particularly besides W. P. in several Tracts of his our deceased friend R. Barclay in his Apology hath writ excellently and fully thereof As also that the Bp. hath allowed W. P. to be Orthodox in what is written in Gospel Truths upon that Point for these Reasons we shall be brief yet as W. P. said in 1671. so say we now that we cannot believe it other then a Sin-pleasing Notion and a Doctrine of Divels since all Men as the Scriptures tell us are to be rewarded according to their deeds to assert That Wicked and Ungodly Men while they continue so are in a state of Acceptance and Justification with God by the righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own person wholly without them which wholy excludes the Work of Sanctification wrought by the Spirit of Christ which was the Notion W. P. did briefly and Geo. Whitehead more largely dispute against in that serious Apology see p. the 37 to 40 and p. 148 and agreeable to the Quakers sense and belief in this point are these following Scriptures Mat. 7. 21 22 23. so 1 John 3. 8 10. Rom. 6. 16. 2 Cor. 5. 10. James 1. 15. Heb. 10. 35. In short altho' we firmly believe and which W. P. and G. W. hath asserted that only Jesus Christ is our Justifier yet we do not believe any are truly justified in the sight of God but such who yield obedience to the Spirit of Christ in themselves by which they come to do the will of God and thereby come to obtain the benefit of what Christ fulfilled in his own person without us in concurrance whereunto we have these Scriptures 1 Cor. 6. 11. Titus 3. 5. Rom. 8. 1 2 11 13 14. Heb. 5. 9. and 12. 14. Gal. 6. 7. 8. Now to draw toward a conclusion upon this head Having proved from that serious Apology in 1671. That W. P. did ascribe our Justification only to Christ and our Reconciliation with God to faith in his blood But grants the benefit of it only to such who obey the Spirit of God in themselves Let us now see whether he be not of the same mind and hath aserted the same Doctrine in 1698. which the Bp. commends as Orthodox Thus Gospel Truth IV. That as we are only justified from the guilt of Sin by Christ the Propitiation and not by works of Righteousness that we have done so there is an absolute necessity that we receive and obey to unfeigned repentance and amendment of Life the holy Light and Spirit of Jesus Christ in order to obtain that Remission and Justification from Sin since no Man can be justified by Christ who walks not after the Spirit but after the flesh for whom he sanctifies them he also justifies and if we walk in the Light as he is Light his precious Blood cleanseth us from all Sin as well from the pollution as guilt of Sin Rom. 3. 22. to 26. Chap. 8. 1 2 3 4. 1 John 1. 7. We will not spend farther time to comment upon the matter to shew how agreeable W. P's Belief was in 1671. to what it was in 1698. being so very plain that it would be but time lost so to do and therefore we leave it with the Impartial Reader Again the Bp But says W. P. if the Bp. commends their believing in Christ as a propitiation for Sin he ought not to have censured them as short in any fundamental Article of Christian Religion for that all the rest follow from or are comprehended in this p. 25. 26. truly says the Bp. he ought Answ Here again we must charge the Bp. with unfairness in laying down words directly as W. P's in a Different Character the better to make them appear to be his and foisting in several that are none of his the Bp. Cites p. 25. 26. First Impression for these words and therefore we will lay down W. P's words in these two pages from whence the Bp. pretends to take them and then let the Reader judg in the matter Thus W. P. p. 28.

the 2 d. Impression Who ever believes in Christ as a Propitiation in order to remission of Sins and justification of Sinners from the guilt of Sin can hardly disbelieve any fundamental Article of the Christian Religion Then goes on to prove that such a Believer must necessarily believe in God because it is with him alone Man is to be justified in Christ because that is the very Proposition and in the holy Ghost because he is the Author of his Conviction Repentance and Belief c. See that page again p. 28. Adds thus So that acknowledging the necessity of Christ as a Propitiation in order to the remission of Sin comprehends the main Doctrine of Christian Religion and as so many lines drawn from the Circumference to the Center they all meet and center in Christ and indeed it is as the Navel of Christianity and Characteristick of that Religion I would intreat him meaning the Bp. again to reflect well upon his own acknowledgment and commendation of our Belief concerning the end and benefit of Christ to mankind and he cannot think us so deficient much less under such strong and dangerous delusions as he has been pleased to represent us Thus W. P. in these tvvo pages vvhich vve vvould have our Reader to compare vvith vvhat the Bp. has laid dovvn as his And 1st see vvhat just ground the Bp. could have had to raise such contradiction had he taken W. P's ovvn vvords 2ly Whether the Bp. did vvell in Quoting these vvords directly as W. P's vvithout giving notice he drevv them consequentially vvhich in justice he ought to have done But to be sure very unfair in him to add several vvords never spoke by W. P. for besides packing the vvhole together vvithout any break as W. P's vvhich are none of his as they lye he has added these for all the rest follovv from But vve novv come to his Arguments deduced from the premises he has made for W. P. Says the Bp. meaning himself He does not find the Quakers to be so good at believing or drawing due consequences or deducing and discovering all the particulars comprehended in generalls To vvhich vve ansvver in short that vve do not vvonder he should tell us so vvho so strenuously endeavours to misrepresent us not only in what 's past but in much that follows 2 Says the Bp. It is not true that all the fundamentals of Christian Religion follow from or are comprehended in this Doctrine Christ is our Propitiation some of them particularly mentioned by Mr. P. do not thence follow as that there is a holy Ghost that he convinceth Men of Sin c. Nay not that p. 34. That Christ is ascended for he might have been a Propitiation and Sacrifice as were those under the Law and yet never have ascended no nor rose again Mind Reader the words all and follow from nor the deduced words does not thence follow were not spoke by W. P. But leaving that with thee we will now attend to justifie W. P's words Then say we by the same rule That no Man can say Jesus is the Lord but by the holy Ghost as saith the Scriptures 1 Cor. 12. 3. Nor no Man understand or savingly believe or know the things of God but by the Spirit of God according to 1 Cor. 2. 10 11 12. tho' we confess they may and do pretend to both traditionally so likewise no Man can truly and savingly believe Christ as a Propitiation in order to the remission of Sin but by the same Spirit and as such a true Believer hath the holy Ghost for the authour of his saving conviction and belief so consequently he must believe there is a holy Ghost as W. P. well observeth and which convinceth for Sin according to John 16 18. But that we may not be misunderstood we do not here mean of such extraordinary Revelations as of the knowledg of the outward History of Christ's death and sufferings but as of the illumination of the holy Ghost in such agreeing with the holy Scriptures But as to such from whom God hath with-held the knowledge of the Scriptures or outward History we shall speak of that in its place in the mean time we say he that believes as aforesaid to give W. P's own words Can hardly disbelieve any fundamental Article of Christian Religion and comprehends the main Doctrine of Christian Religion and as so many lines drawn from the Circumference to the Center they all Center in Christ Then as to the Bp's saying Christ might have been a Propitiation and Sacrifice as were those under the Law and yet never have ascended no nor rose again To say nothing of the disproportion between the sacrifices under the Law and the one Sacrifice of Christ for the remission of Sins we ask how came the Bp. so greatly to ofrget himself thus to assert both in contradiction to the holy Scriptures as well as his friend Geo Keith whom he quotes as a close evidence against us for to the owning of and belief in Christ as a Propitiation for the remission of Sins as W. P. hath done It was no less necessary to that end that Christ should rise again as that he should suffer See Rom. 4. 25. besides other Scriptures which for brevity we omit Where speaking of Christ who was delivered for our Offences and raised again for our Justification here the Apostle makes Christs suffering and rising again necessary to his being a Propitiation contrary to the Bp. Next G. Keith in page 26. of his first Narrative says expressly thus I say with them and all Christendom that if Christ had died and not risen again he could not have been an attonement for our Sins this is so full and contrary to the Bp's Assertion that we think 't will both puzzle the Bp. and his Advocate G. K. to reconcile the contradiction But it may be hoped the Bp. will retract rather then have G. K. and if he can believe G. K. as readily against himself as he doth against us all Christendom against him Now to his third head saith the Bp. thus To tell Mr. P. thus much as to his Paper once for all Implication of Faith is not a profession of Faith Answ We allow 't is not so in all cases as we shall find it in the Bp. hereafter particularly in pages 19 20. of his Reply and such strange sort of Implications too as that we think no such consequence can possibly be deduced from his premises as he makes but in our case it is otherwise and had he been an Impartial Reader as he pretended and had had but a grain of Charity in him towards us it would have saved all this work while that Paper called Gospel Truths vvas but a brief account as it tells us and the Bp. had R. Barcla's Apology vvhich states and vindicates most of our Principles largely as also W. P's Rise and Progress of the Quakers doth several of them briefly vvhich vve should think vvould have

that Paper which he gave the Bp. was not writ for an exact and compleat account of our Belief and in the Defence page 25. to 28. had declared that to believe in God is to believe him Omnipotent Omniscient and Omnipresent and that in believing in Christ as a propitiation in order to remission of Sins and justification of Sinners from the guilt of Sin was included not only believing in God Christ and the Holy Spirit but a belief of Heaven Hell Rewards and Punishments and consequently the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust this one would think had been enough to have satisfied the Bp. or any one else that had not a mind to misrepresent or cavil which it may be feared the Bp. has As to what the Bp. saith p. 4 A great Man has told us of the Gentile world and their belief in multiplicity of Gods c. It nothing concerns us we are not accountable for their but our own belief and had W. P. been to present some heathen Pontiff with our Confession of Faith concerning God and his Attributes no doubt he would have been more explicit and large then what is contained not only in the Paper called Gospel Truths but even in that Creed called the Apostles But while he intended that Paper for professed Christians he thought what was delivered therein concerning God sufficient to satisfie any who had not a mind to cavil But so earnest is the Bp. in pursuit of W. P. and the Quakers that in seeking occasion against them he plainly mistakes the Scriptures which we now come to shew Thus the Bp. p. 4. Mr. P. saith that Heb. 11. 6. seems exprest for a declaration of faith in God The Bp. takes the freedom to inform him that it was not at all intended for a full confession of Christian Faith as to that Article thereof touching the Beeing Nature and Works of God but only of such an initial or natural Faith which Men had or might have without Revelation for of the Faith of such viz. Abell and Enoch and those who lived before the Flood without any Revelation that we read of he there discourses Thus the Bp. Answ We answer for W. P. that he neither wants nor desires the Bp's Information unless it were more agreeable to Scripture then we shall find this The Bp's words here doth consist of two parts the one that the Faith of Abell Enoch and those who lived before the Flood was initial and natural without any revelation that we read of Next that Heb. 11. 6. was a discourse of such a natural Faith now if we prove the first was divine Faith and the last was no discourse of natural Faith it naturally follows the Bp. hath misrepresented the Scriptures to which purpose we will begin with the first verse in the Chapter Heb. 11. 1. Now faith is the substance of things hoped for the evidence of things not seen And that this Faith was not natural but divine Faith according to Eph. 2. 8. appears very plainly from the context by the effects it produced Vers 2. By it the Elders obtained a good report Vers 3. Through Faith we understand the worlds were made by the word of God Vers 4. By Faith Abell offered unto God a more acceptable Sacrifice then Cain by which he obtained witness that he was righteous Vers 5. By Faith Enoch was translated that he should not see Death for before his translation he had this Testimony that he pleased God Now to the 6. Vers Which the Bp. says was a discourse of natural and initial Faith Vers 6. But without Faith it is impossible to please him for he that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him mind Reader the last part of this Verse was a part of what was laid down in Gospel Truths for our belief in God Vers 7. By Faith Noah being warned of God of things not seen as yet moved with fear prepared an Ark to the saving of his house by which he condemned the World and became heir of righteousness by Faith So the Apostle proceeds to the end of that Chapter which is long shewing the great and extraordinary effects of this divine Faith The Bp. seems to restrain the Text Heb. 11. 6. Only to the Faith of those who lived before the Flood But the Apostle passes on from Abel Enoch Noah to Abraham and the rest of the Patriarchs who lived between the Flood and the Law nor does the Apostle put any difference between the Faith of those before the Flood between the Flood and the Law or under the Law which the Bp. may do well to consider as also that Jude says expressly Enoch prophesied see Vers 14. Will he say he prophesied without Revelation But to shorten upon the first head Those Scriptures already cited do so plainly prove our point that we need not trouble the Reader with any more to shew that it was not natural but supernatural Faith those holy Men were endued withall by which in particular Enoch prophesied and was translated and Noah was warned to build the Ark which besides the rest are two such plain and extraordinary instances of supernatural Faith by Revelation from God that we cannot but admire the Bp. should assert those who lived before the Flood had no Revelation that we read of but what was natural and initial We leave it with the Reader and proceed to the second part in which the Bp. asserted that Heb. 11. 6. Was not at all intended for a full confession of Christian Faith touching the Beeing Nature and Works of God but of natural and initial Faith To which we answer as hath been already shewn they had divine Faith and Revelation before the Flood so consequently the Bp's Arguments do fall in course However the Text it self with the context very plainly intends spiritual and divine Faith not only with respect to those extraordinary effects produced by true Faith as well before as after the Flood but also seems expressed as W. P. hath asserted for Faith in God And we say Christian Faith too because the Apostle speaks in the present tense notwithstanding his Attributes be not there enumerated no more then they were by Moses in the word I am Instanced by W. P. but past over in silence by the Bp. Now to that Vers 6. We take leave to ask the Bp. what Faith it was they were to come unto God by and without which it was impossible to please him whether was it Natural and initial or Spiritual and supernatural Faith if he answers as he said before Natural we tell him that cannot be since the Scripture tells us all were by nature Children of wrath and that Man naturally has nothing nor can perform any thing acceptable to God see these Texts John 15. 5. Eph. 2. 3. Pro. 20. 24. 1 Cor. 2. 14. Besides many other Scriptures consequently then that Faith mentioned Heb. 11. 6. intended no other then