Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A27059
|
Two disputations of original sin I. of original sin as from Adam, II. of original sin as from our neerer parents : written long ago for a more private use, and now published (with a preface) upon the invitation of Dr. T. Tullie / by Richard Baxter.
|
Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.
|
1675
(1675)
|
Wing B1439; ESTC R5175
|
104,517
|
242
|
want of necessary grace to innocent nature as the adversaries think is plain for necessary grace hath some sufficiency to its ends and go it it is called sufficient grace by the adversaries commonly But that which never attaineth its end in any one person in the World in their own judgment is not sufficient It is their common and last argument against our doctrine of special effectual grace given to all the elect as distinct from that sufficient grace which say the Dominicans is given to others that the grace is not sufficient that never proveth effectual in any We may much more confidently say so here when we speak of the whole World that the grace is not sufficient that never is was or will be effectual in any If it suffice to make the event naturally possible yet not to remove the moral impossibility 3. And that God is the Author of the Law that forbiddeth sin and of innocent nature is granted and past doubt The certainty of this universal event cannot come from a contingent cause as such The will is naturally free that chooseth but it is not morally free or else the World would not choose evil So that it is certain that if there be no original sin the cause of this universal event that all men sin must be resolved to be somewhat in nature or something in providence of which God is the cause If God have so framed pure nature and so order the affairs of the World that no man on earth shall eventually escape the sin which he so much prohibiteth and abhorreth it must needs follow that he is the moral reputative cause at least And yet it is one of the pretences against the doctrine of original sin that it maketh God the Author of it in infants when it 's they that make him the Author of it in all Seeing therefore that sin hath so overspread the World that all men sin in all Countries in all Ages except Christ this must proceed either from mans natural principles and so be chargeable upon God his Maker or it is the fruit of original sin and to be charged on our first Parents and our selves Arg. 19. If infants have in their corrupted natures a virtual enmity to God and Holiness then have they original sin but such an enmity they have I mean in disposition seed or habit go they have original sin The antecedent or minor I prove 1. From the common experience of the World that manifest such an enmity as soon as they come to the use of reason and that maintain it so obstinately till renewing grace do overcome it How early do they shew an aversness to the work and ends for which they were created How little do the precepts of Parents or Teachers and all the means of grace themselves to conquer it in the most And where it is most conquered even in the godly it is most confessed because there is a troublesome remnant of it still so that there is no man in the World that hath not more or less of it in him the wicked being under the power of it and the godly under the trouble of these remainders 2. From Gen. 3. 15. Joh. 3. 5 6. Rom. 8. 3 5 6 7 8 9. Rom. 7. 21 23 24 25 compared In Joh. 3. 6. we find that flesh begets but flesh That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that go a new birth by the spirit is necessary to make us spiritual of which before In Rom. 8. we find that it was through the flesh that the Law was weak and that God sending his son in the likeness of sinful flesh not as sinful but as flesh and for sin condemned sin in the flesh Where it is undeniable that by flesh is not meant sin it self for then it had not been called sinful nor the subject of sin nor Christ said to have taken the likeness of it and go the word flesh here is taken in no worse a sense than in Joh. 3. 6. We find here also that all flesh is universally called sinful which Christ took the likeness of And Christ took the likeness of infants and that first only growing up to the likeness of the adult infants go have sinful flesh And ver 5 6. This flesh as the principle that prevaileth in some is opposed to the spirit which prevaileth in others and their fruits opposed the one sort mind fleshly things the other spiritual things and death belongs to one and life and peace to the other And ver 7. The carnal mind is enmity against God for it is not subject to the Law of God neither indeed can be And ver 8. They that are in the flesh cannot please God that is they that have not the spirit to subdue and mortify the flesh as it is explained ver 9. And if any man have not the spirit of Christ he is none of his So that flesh without spirit which is now mans natural estate is a principle of enmity and rebellion and proves men none of Christ's and in a state of death And many Expositors judge that in Gen. 3. 15. such being none of Christ's till they have the spirit are annumerated to the serpents seed that hath the enmity against the spiritual seed which so sheweth it self when they come to age that as Cain by Abel and Ishmael by Isaack so still He that is born after the flesh persecuteth him that is born after the spirit if not restrained Gal. 4. 29. And Rom. 7. 18. I know that in me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing that is in Paul so far as he was without the spirit And as this innate universal enmity is thus proved so it is proved to be sin 1. By the Law of nature which tells us that an habitual enmity of the rational creature against God and Holiness is sin if any thing be sin It is an inclination or disposition contrary to the primitive nature and moral image of God in man and contrary to what our relation to God importeth and as it is commonly said of actual hatred of God it may as truly if not much more evidently be said of this dispositive virtual enmity that it is an evil that cannot become good and so naturally sin that it can be no other 2. It 's proved to be sin by the express assertion of the Text. Rom. 8. 3. 10. it is sinful flesh and the subject of sin till the spirit come Ver. 9. it proves them none of Christ ' s. Rom. 7. 14. 17. 20. 24 25. it is called in-dwelling sin and a Law of sin and to be carnal is to be sold under sin 3. From the effects which nothing can produce but sin They cannot be subject to the Law of God They please not God To be carnally minded is death c. Rom. 8. So 1 Cor. 2. 14. The natural meerly animal man now in his corrupt estate receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness
sin go c. The major is proved 1. In that they have immortal souls and virtually rational 2. They are under many promises and threats that are mentioned in the Scripture 3. They are disciples of Christ and members of his Church The minor is plain 1. In that they make infants uncapable of any moral evil eo nomine because they have no actual volition or choice 2. And thereby they conclude them uncapable of moral good 3. And thereby they conclude them uncapable of judgment 4. And of any rewards 5. And of any punishments 6. And they say they are under no law or obligation 7. And go they can be no subjects of Christ's Kingdom or members of his Church Only God may do with them what he will and so he may with bruits Arg. 16. The infants of the unbelieving Gentiles were sinners and children of wrath go infants are capable of sin and some at least are sinners c. The antecedent is proved from Gal. 2. 15. We Jews by nature or birth and not sinners of the Gentiles i. e. by nature 1 Cor. 7. 14. Else were your children unclean but now are they holy The Anabaptists make this to speak but of legitimation The Papists by being unclean think nothing is meant but being not baptizable and to be holy they think is but to be baptizable and and that a posteriore because it is presumed that such infants will be religiously educated but Christ hath instituted no Baptism but what is for remission of sin and he doth not actually remit sin to some more than to others upon a presumption of the Church that they will hereafter be educated as Christians There is some holiness mentioned by the Apostle which is the reason why those infants more than others are to be admitted to Baptism which supposeth and signifieth it and that cannot be only a thing future and uncertain Divines commonly call it among Protestants a federal holiness and that this supposeth infants capable of moral good and evil I have shewed on this Text in my Treatise of Infants Baptism Eph. 2. 3. And were by nature the children of wrath even as others Forasmuch as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth nature birth or natural disposition properly and signifieth custom only by a rare and improper acception go it is not here to be interpreted by custom without such cogent evidence as none hath yet given us Those that attempt a collecting of testimonies for this improper use sometimes do give us many that make against them There is no necessity that will warrant our reception of such a tropical and unusual sense Job 11. 12. For vain man would be wise though man be born as a wild asses colt that is of a rude sottish unruly disposition Ezek. 16. 2 3 4. Son of man cause Jerusalem to know her abominations and say Thus saith the Lord God unto Jerusalem Thy Birth and thy Nativity is of the Land of Canaan thy Father was an Amorite and thy Mother an Hittite and as for thy Nativity in the day thou wast born thy navel was not cut neither wast thou washed c. This allegory sheweth that part of Jerusalem ' s abhomination was natural from the birth and nothing but sin is abhomination before God Job 25. How then can man be justified with God or how can he be clean that is born of a woman 15. 14. What is man that he should be clean and he that is born of a woman that he should be righteous The illustration that is fetch'd from the natural weakness and impurity of the Heavens the Moon the Stars doth not contradict the exposition of the former words as of moral impurity for the impurity is according to the subject and natural impurity is not unrighteousness Arg. 17. From the necessity of regeneration Joh. 3. 3 5 6. Except a man be born again he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit If there be a necessity of a new birth to make us spiritual the first birth bringing forth but flesh before we can enter into the Kingdom of God then by the first birth we are born in sin But the antecedent is certain go so is the consequent The minor is plain in the Text 1. That flesh begets not spirit but flesh 2. That regeneration is therefore of absolute necessity At present I will suppose that by flesh here is not meant sin that the adversary may not think I beg any thing of him The consequence of the major hath this double proof 1. Because flesh without spirit in a rational creature is sinful or morally corrupt for being deprived of the spirit it is deprived of moral good 2. Because nothing but sin can keep a rational creature and subject of God out of Heaven for to be kept out of Heaven is one half at least of the damned's misery and to live and know that loss as immortal souls must do will produce also positive punishment Arg. 18. That doctrine is untrue which maketh God the Author of sin but so doth the denial of Original sin go it is untrue The major will be granted The minor I prove The doctrine which feigneth that innocent nature is under such a moral impossibility of not sinning as that no one person in all the World that hath the use of reason shall escape it doth feign God to be the Author of sin But so doth their doctrine that deny original sin go it feigneth God to be the Author of sin Or The doctrine which feigneth that innocent nature doth sin for want of necessary grace to escape it doth make God the Author of sin But so doth the denial of original sin go c. For the proof of the major of both Arguments consider 1. That the adversaries suppose nature in infants to be innocent 2. That it is granted by them that de facto all men that have the use of reason are sinners except Jesus Christ the Papists except also the Virgin Mary If they denied this it 's easily proved 1. By the common experience of the World as to the generality 2. By plain Scripture 1 Joh. 1. 8. 10. If we say that we have no sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us If we say that we have not sinned we make him a liar and his word is not in us Jam. 3. 2. For in many things we offend all Eccl. 7. 20. For there is not a just man on earth that doth good and sinneth not And that there is a moral impossibility to escape sin appeareth 1. By the universality of the event that which no man in all the World in any age attaineth to notwithstanding all the helps vouchsafed is morally impossible 2. And the Scripture assertion proveth it in that it alloweth us to conclude it of all that we know not and of those that are yet unborn And that the World sinneth for