Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	believe_v	faith_n	gospel_n	5,265	5	6.8864	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A36522	Klētoi tetērēmēnoi, or, The Saints perseverance asserted in its positive grounds and vindicated from all material exceptions against it occasioned by a late immodest account of two conferences upon that point, between Tho. Danson and Mr. Jer. Ives, published by the said Mr. Ives, which account is also herein rectified, and its falshood detected to the just shame of the publisher / by Tho. Danson.	Danson, Thomas, d. 1694.	1672 (1672)	Wing D214; ESTC R24868	39,229	95

Sinners to repentance which is spoken of the Pharisees verse 11. who did outwardly appear righteous unto men Chap. 23.28 which outward appearance was ground enough for that denomination of righteous 2. That the wicked man whom Ezekiel speaks of was truly wicked therefore the righteous man he speaks of must be truly righteous Reply 1. Math. 9.13 Before alledged answers this Argument The Publicans and Sinners viz. open debauched Persons were truly Sinners yet were not the Pharisees truly righteous Rep. 2. We retort upon them that the Text speaking of a wicked man as visibly wicked therefore the righteous man may be understood of him that is visibly righteous only Such as Paul whilst a Pharisee Phil. 3.6 And so the Antithesis is more direct and the Description here given of a righteous man viz. The forbearance of external gross acts of Sin Idolatry Adultery c. Ezek. 18.6 7. And the doing of external acts of Mercy Justice verse 8 9. sufficiently favours our limitation Excep 2. is this That the Death here spoken of is but a Temporal Death immediately and explicitly The reason of this our assertion is because the Lord does evidently vindicate himself from the imputation cast upon him by the wicked Jews that in their Publick Calamities he exceeded the desert of their personal Sins Ezek. 18.2 19 25 29. So we must understand those Complaints for we do not find that they charge him with casting them into Hell for their Fathers sins nor is there any weight in what the Arminians urge for extending the phrase 1. That the Death here spoken of is opposed to the life promised to the Penitent which is eternal life Reply 1. The Arminians here forsake their own Principle which is that there 's no express Promise of eternal life in the Old Testament 2. Though we deny not but that eternal life in Old Testament and New is promised to the Penitent yet we deny that by life here is meant at least immediately and explicitly eternal life but onely temporal for God speaks ad idem as of the same Death the Jews complain'd of so of the same life they were desirous of 2. That then a flagitious Sinner may escape eternal Death without Repentance Reply We deny the Consequence because though this Scripture does not explicitly threaten eternal Death to such a Sinner yet other Scriptures do as 1 Cor. 6.9 10. Except 3. We except against their position from a supposition that by the righteous man were meant a truly righteous man that therefore it is simply possible that a righteous man should totally and finally depart from his righteousness and die eternally For 1. When Christ sayes If a man abide not in me he is cast forth as a branch and is withered c. John 15.6 That conditional enunciation does not imply a simple possibility of the antecedent and consequent viz. of the total and final Apostacy and damnation of all the men that are in Christ for of the Apostles Christ sayes I have chosen you and ordained you that you should go and bring forth fruit and that your Fruit should remain verse 16. And I appoint unto you a Kingdom as my Father hath appointed unto me Luke 22.29 2. We cannot suppose a greater possibility of the Antecedent and Consequent in this Enunciation If the Righteous turn away from his righteousness he shall die then in this If the Wicked turn away from his wickedness he shall live But from this conditional Enunciation cannot be inferr'd a simple possibility of the conversion of all wicked men and of their Salvation the Arminians themselves being Judges For if so then Gods prescience of the final impenitency and perdition of some wicked men must needs be denied which yet in their good moods the Arminians stick not to grant Vide Ames Anti Synodalia Art 5. c. 2. Another Scripture urged by the Arminians is Matth. 13.20 21. Whence they observe 1. That these Persons have a Description given of them agreeing to true Believers 1. That they receive or believe the Word 2. With gladness 3. They profess the Faith Answ To the parts of the Description 1. Believing is ascribed to the Devil of this truth That there is a God James 2.19 And this That Jesus is the Christ and Son of God Luke 4.41 Which belief is else-where made an evidence of a new Birth 1 John 5.1 By the collation of which places we rightly conclude That every believing does not denominate men true Believers For if the Devils believing be not true Faith why should every believing of Mens yea the Scripture tells us that Simon Magus believed and that at the same time his heart was not right in the sight of God Acts 8.13 21. See also John 2.23 24. 2. To the second we have spoken already in answer to Heb. 6.5 3. To the third Luke 4.41 may suffice where the Devil openly professes the Faith as well as secretly believes it See also Acts 16.17 Where the Devil openly acknowledges the Gospel to be the way of Salvation And Acts 19.15 he owns Christ's Authority over him as the Lord and Pauls as the Servant c. When yet the Apostle tells us That no man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 12.3 Whence I infer that every Profession is not an indicium or mark of true Faith 2. The Arminians observe That the stony-ground-Hearers were not Hypocrites and therefore true Believers Answ We have spoken to this before we distinguish in the Antecedent of Hypocrites Some are not nor care to be what yet they would be taken for in that sense we grant their Antecedent Others esteem themselves what they are not so we deny their Antecedent In this last sense they were Hypocrites which is evident because 't is said they had no root in a tropical term and are opposed to a good and honest heart which is the explication of that term which only the last sort had Matth. 13.21 compared with Luke 8.15 3. The Arminians affirm That perseverance is not of the essence of true Faith and therefore these Persons might have true Faith though they fell away Answ We distinguish in the Antecedent between that which is of the essence of true Faith Constitutivè and Consecutivè i. e. between that which is an essential part of true Faith and an adjunct or Property inseparable from it Ex hypothesi cause efficientis externae upon supposition of some external efficient causes of operation Thus the Moon suffers an Eclipse alway when the Earth interposes between the Sun and it Thus supposing a continual influence of Grace which God hath decreed and promised to afford as we have proved to true Faith perseverance is a necessary adjunct of it Another Scripture alledged by the Armini●ns is Heb. 10.38 Now the Just shall live by Faith but if any man draw back my Soul shall have no pleasure in him Where they observe That we put any man instead of he i. e. the

18.21 I have not wickedly departed from my God Whence I urge an Argument in form He that had never wickedly departed from God had never fallen away totally from Grace But David had never wickedly departed from God Ergo David had never fallen away totally from Grace The major I presume they deny not The minor I suppose will not down with them because they may imagine that this was spoken before his total Apostacy But to me 't is evident That David speaks this of himself after the supposed time of his total Apostacy For it was spoken after God had delivered him from the hands of all his Enemies as appears by the Title of the Psalm and he takes notice particularly of Gods delivering him from the strivings of his People i. e. his own Subjects verse 43. which evidently relates to the Rebellion of Absolom and Sheba which were after and a punishment of those Sins of David by which the Arminians pretend he fell away totally from Grace as any one may inform himself that will compare 2 Sam. Chap. 11.12 and Chap. 12.10 with Chap. 15 c. and the 20th And when those Sins were committed David was in actual contest with his Enemies 2 Sam. 11.1 2 c. And if in any sin David had wickedly departed from God we may judge in that by the black brand which the Holy Ghost sets upon that 1 Kings 15.5 Another instance is of Solomon from whose Idolatry and other Sins they infer his total Apostacy and final too and so consequently his Damnation 1 Kings 11. Answ 1. As to his Idolatry not every degree of that sin argues a defection from true Grace as is evident by Exod. 32.5 25. in the instance of Aaron and 1 Cor. 10.20 21 22. And as for Polygamy Custom had so blinded mens eyes that few saw the evil of it Answ 2. There 's no Sin except that against the Holy Ghost which a Child of God may not be guilty of because the body of Sin is not dead though deadly wounded but like a sick man ever and anon giving ground for a belief that his recovery is possible But that he was not a total Apostate or ceased to be a Believer We argue thus 1. In that all the Writers of the Holy Scripture are simply affirmed to be holy Men of God 2 Pet. 1.21 whereof Solomon was one 2. Because he is said to be loved of God 2 Sam. 12.24 Now the love of God is everlasting John 13.1 That Solomon was not a final Apostate we prove thus 1. In that he repented of his Miscarriages as appears by the Title The Penitent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which word and thing the learned may find useful Observations amass'd by Mr. Pool in his Synopsis Crit. Comm. in Eccles 1. Given to Ecclesiastes as our Translation calls it and particularly of giving himself to Women Chap. 7.26 under which and that phrase of Inventions verse ult he seems to include his Idolatry which for ought appears to me was not by personal worship but by connivance at or at most allowance of Temples for his Wives Idolatrous Worship 1 Kings 11.7 8. 2. From his being joyned with David as a President for Rehoboams walking 2 Chron. 12.17 Many other Arguments Pro and Con might be produced but it is not necessary these have much more probability then the Scriptures silence of his Repentance which is the Arminians main Argument No Scriptures mention Noahs Lots c. Repentance of those heinous Sins Gen. 9. 19. yet none doubt or have ground at least of their Repentance A third instance is given in Peter whom though Bellarmin speaks favourably of as to total Apostacy De Rom. Pontif. l. 4. c. 8. Perdidit confessionem Fidei non ipsam fidem Yet the Lutherans Hinckelman Hunnius c. give him for another instance of true Believers falling totally from Grace Their first Argument is drawn from the nature of his Sin viz. a denial of Christ He that denies Christ before Men shall be denied by Christ before the Father which proposition is contained Matth. 10.33 But so did Peter Ergo he shall be denied by Christ Answ 1. In general this Argument if it were wholly granted them proves his final Apostacy which themselves deny as we shall find in their next Argument 2. We Answer The proposition is to be understood of a final denial of Christ and then we deny the minor for Peter quickly repented of his denial Matth. 26. ult To inforce their major the Arminians urge The denial of Christ was an Heresie and therefore puts the Denyer into a state of Damnation Answ We distinguish of Heresie 't is considered either materially or formally To the latter pertinacy or obstinacy is a necessary ingredient which Peter's speedy Repentance assures us he was not guilty of The Arminians second Argument is this He that was to be converted anew to the Faith had lost the Faith he had But Peter was to be converted anew to the Faith Ergo he had lost the Faith he had The minor is proved by Luke 22.32 Answ We distinguish in the minor between a specifical and a gradual Conversion A recovery from prevailing Sin is call'd Conversion Matth. 18.3 which is spoken of adding to all their other Graces that of Humility for they were converted before And the reason of this denomination is because The increase of Grace is by adding a new degree of Grace as in making Candles when a Candle is put anew into the fat of boyled Tallow every time it is put in it comes out bigger And this is done by a new act of Creation put forth by God c. To borrow the Reason and apt Similitude for the illustration of it of that most excellent Divine Dr. Tho. Goodwin Trial of Christian growth pag. 165. But that Peter did not fall away totally is evident from Christ's Prayer Luke 22.32 which that it is always answered hath been proved which must be meant either not at all which the event assures us was not Christ's meaning or not totally or finally which last the words will not bear A fourth Instance is of the Galatians ch 5.4 whence they argue thus The Galatians ●ell from Grace The Galatians were true Believers Ergo True Believers have fallen from Grace Answ 1. If the major or minor being indefinite be equivalent to an Universal we deny ●hem both 2. To the major we say That by falling from Grace is not meant falling from true inherent Grace but the Doctrine of Grace or the truth of the Gospel which teaches Justification by Grace through Faith not by Works as seemes evident by comparing the Phrase elsewhere opposed to another Gopel which supposes Grace to be one Gospel Gal. 1.6 A fifth of Hymeneus and Alexander 1 Tim. 1.19 20. whence they argue They that have put away Faith and a good Conscience are totally and finally fallen away from Grace But so had Hymeneus and Alexander Ergo They were fallen away Answ We