Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	faith_n	justify_v	object_n	1,744	5	9.2095	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A38139	A short review of some reflections made by a nameless author upon Dr. Crisp's sermons, in a piece entituled Crispianism unmask'd with some remarks upon the union in the late agreement in doctrin among the dissenting ministers in London : subscribed the 16th of December, 1692, and that as referring unto the present debates ... / by Thomas Edwards, esq.	Edwards, Thomas, fl. 1693-1699.; Crisp, Tobias, 1600-1643.	1693 (1693)	Wing E236; ESTC R31409	64,054	46

this day He says My second is that which is procured for any one thereunto he hath a right The thing that is obtained is granted by him of whom it is obtained and that to them for whom it is obtained To this is answered 1. In the Margent that I should make Appendix to Dr. Owen 's Answer to Biddle p. 35. great Changes in England if I could make all the Lawyers believe this strange Doctrine but of what the Lawyers believe or do not believe Mr. B. is no Competent Judge be it spoken without Disparagement for the Law is not his study I who perhaps have much less skill than him self will be bound at any time to give him Twenty Cases out of the Civil and Cannon Law to make good this Assertion which if he knows not that it may be done he ought not to speak with such Confidence of these things Nay amongst our own Lawyers whom perhaps he intends I am sure I may be informed that if a M●n intercede with another to settle his Land by conveyance to a third Person giving him that Conveyance to keep in trust until the time come that he should by the Intention of the Conveyer enjoy the Land though he for whom it is granted have not the least knowledge of it yet he hath such a Right unto the Land thereby created as cannot be disanull'd This is the very thing for which it is that Dr. Crisp brings in this Text and Beza's Annotation thereupon and that in the very Page whence the Charge is fetcht Namely that Justification is truly and properly the work of God himself and cannot be the work of Faith Nay he goes farther Suppose says he Dr. Crisp's Works Vol. 2. Pag. 325. you should have the words to run as they are commonly render'd I answer Then are we to distinguish in Faith of two things there is the Act it self of believing and the Object on which we do believe and so the words may be understood thus Being justified by the Righteousness of Faith or by the Righteousness of Christ which we do believe We have Peace with God and so ascribe our Justification to the Object of our believing the Righteousness of Christ and not to the Act of Believing The truth is Beloved the Act of Believing is a Work and as much our Work as our Fear and Prayer and love is and the Apostle should contradict himself when he saith We are saved by Grace through Faith not of Works if he mean the Act of Faith And he might as well have said We are not justified by Works but we are justified by Works This he further distinguishes in the same Page unto which I refer thee which our Author with various huffing Reflections and rotten Inferences most partially and falsly quotes in his 6th and 7th Pages That to be short there is not only a distinction between the Act and Object of Faith and that as properly relating unto our Justification and Righteousness therein but also to God's Act of our Justification in Heaven as fully Precedaneous to the termination thereof in Conscience Dr. Owen upon the 1 Cor. 1. 30. in his refutation of Socinus and Bellarmine tells us That Christ is made of God Righteousness unto us in such a way and manner as the nature of the thing doth require Say some it is because by him we are justified However the Text says not That by him we are justified but he is of God made Righteousness unto us which is not our Dr. Owen of Justification p. 502. Justification but the Ground Cause and Reason whereon we are justified Righteousness is one thing and Justification is another Now either this Righteousness is in an eternal decretive and material sense truly and irrevocably theirs before they believe or upon what Grounds is it that God can be reckoned just in his justifying of them even when they believe But there is a secret grub lies at the bottom of all this our Author's Indignation which we must endeavour to find out See Dr. Owen against Mr. Baxter in the fore-mentioned Appendix Now I say that in the sense wherein I affirm that Justification is terminated in Conscience I may yet also affirm and that suitably to the utmost Intention Dr. Owen 's Appendix against Mr. Baxter in his Answer to Biddle pag. 19. of mine in that expression that Justification by Faith is not a knowledge or feeling of Justification before given nor a Justification in or by our own Consciences but somewhat that goes before all such Justification as this is and is a Justification before God And is not this true How many scores of our ancient solid Reformers might be brought in to attest this truth wherein and whereby they distinguish'd themselves in a Fundamental sense as Protestants from Papists But it seems as our Author thinks Dr. Crisp did not pitch upon a right Text in this of Rom. 5. 1. though it and it s Context undeniably prove he did to fix this his Discrimination upon and therefore alters the Scene of the Charge against him i e. from a distinguishing to a confounding Explication p. 7. where he to his own Admiration no doubt Learnedly explains Gal. 3. 24. for if the Apostle's Sense or Meaning be the same in one place of his Epistles as well as in another when he speaks more especially of being justified by Faith which our Author firmly asserts why then should he make a distinction between the Act and Object of Faith from Gal. 3. 24. which he denies unto the same Apostle from Rom. 5. 1. in Beza's Interpretation and the Doctor 's Quotation of him for that end A strong Memory I see is exceeding requisite for a Lying and Prevaricating Spirit This is not far unlike the Devil's Proceedings with Job who when he saw that his Accusation of him before God for an Hypocrite did not prove true or hold Water then does he slily seek by his Wife in an Instrumental Sense to cause him to part with his Integrity Just thus it is that our Author most shamefully spews out his own Treachery Dr. Goodwin upon Eph. 2. 6. saith that Our Salvation is in God's Gifts and in Christ's personating of us mark this piece of Crispianism and apprehending of us it is perfect and compleat though in our Persons as in us it is wrought by degrees Further. pag. 218 219. He Doct. Goodwin upon the Epistle to the Eph. ch 2. 6. p. 217 218. 219. tells us You see the distinction between in Christ and with Christ we are said to be quickned with Christ why because that Work as it is wrought in Christ once for us hath now some Accomplishment in us but speaking of the Resurrection to come he does not say we are raised up in Christ but raised up with Christ do but learn to distinguish for the want of this makes many Men to mistake A Man before he is called he is justified in Christ but not with Christ that is

to return after him only to the spoil That whatever attempts may be made after an Agreement between Dissenting Parties by a Subscrition of Articles true in the real form and verbal the matter thereof yet if the scopal design genuin energy and unsophystieated truths contained thereof be not attended unto and that as arising from a divine clear irresistible and yet Heart-bowing and bending Conviction upon the Conscience will be so far from terminating in their satisfaction as that indeed thereby all such Hypocritical measure being abhorred of God sooner or later a wider gap of Difference will be opened and also deeper and more lasting Exasperations issue from the same Nay such is the watchful and careful Eye of God over and towards even his cajoled and deceived ones that if they will still suffer themselves to be decoyed and gulled by the fair and yet empty pretences of a certain sort of professors he will by one Providence or another as he did by Lot even Fire them out from amongst such Associates which he has truly begun and that with the Fire of his own Sanctuary kindled already for tho' the Embers thereof may seem to be covered for the present by the nasty Ashes of a pretended empty Agreement cast upon them yet in due time he will break through the same by such a flame as shall openly proclaim his Zeal and his being cloathed therewith as a Cloak for his own G●ory establish and confirm his upright ones and bring a dreadful Terror upon the Hypocrites in Zion I come not to bring Peace but the Sword Now the Question to the point in hand will naturally follow namely What it is from or in this Paper of Agreement that should provoke any Man's Pen to drop so much Dislatisfaction against the same and especially considering that so many and so much differing Ministers in their Persuasions have been thereby brought into a seeming open and external coalescency one with another Unto which I shall give thee my thoughts and attend thy better Information as 1. The first Ground of my Dissatisfaction herein is that the Difference in hand as to the Matter is not at all decided or attempted to be decided by this Paper of Agreement but a difference be●ween Persons wherein it appears that the interest of Man is absolutely and that by way of just consequence preferred to the Interest of Christ whose glory in his abstracted and unmixed Truths must it seems be thereby postponed to the carnal welfare and glaring Peace or Prosperity of Man as On Decem● 19. 1692. This Expedient was brought to a Meeting of the Vnited Ministers who unanimously expressed their Approbation in the following Words viz. That these Brethren who at the Desire of the Vnited Ministers considered Paper of Agreement Page 16. some Objections against Mr. Williams his Book having brought in the above mentioned Expedient for the Accommodation of the Matters in Controversie The Vnited Ministers have weighed it and approve of the same Besides it was further declared by them That whereas the Vnited Ministers Collectively considered and as such have not been desired to Approve of Mr. Williams his Book In like manner they do not by any thing in this Agreement imply an Approbation of Mr Chauncy his Writings in this Controversie But yet they do rejoice that both Mr. Williams and Mr. Chauncy have accepted this offered Expedient And would not such Measures as these be reckoned as highly ridiculous as well as treacherous and false for my Servant instead of adjusting my Concerns whereon and whereunto I send him as entrusted with the s●me to take up with a bare sociable Act of Fellowship and Friendship even amongst those with and against whom my present Debate and Controversie lies Now is not all this perfect Sophistry Whence should a necessity proceed of an Agreement Is it from the Matter in Controversie as stated in Polemical Writings and Argumentations between them and that about Truths of the first Magnitude Or is it for the decision of a personal scuffle that this Expedient was formed For we find no Agreement in Doctrin save what is barely subscriptive to the Articles of others mentioned in the least but that of P●●●●ns whilst all this while their Treatises are at War with and Battling one another an 〈◊〉 from the allowed Precautions of both Authors as expressed in this Paper of Agreeme●● ●●gether with their distinct Testimonies in the same each resolving to keep his 〈…〉 But 2 〈…〉 s●cond Ground of my Dissatisfaction herein is That so sound Articles and Fundam●●●●● Doctrins therein of Faith should be made a Pretextual Covering of such Agreem●●● 〈◊〉 sin against such Truth or Light and to make a Pander of the latter to serve the 〈…〉 the former Wherefore lest any one might suppose me over-censorious in this I 〈…〉 3 〈…〉 Ground of my Dissatisfaction herein is That the Matter it self mainly in 〈…〉 which is not at all touched upon in the Paper of Agreement but perfectly avoided 〈…〉 therein still adhering to their own Judgment in what they had written is 〈…〉 Fundamental not either Gradual or Circumstantial which appears from these words It is hereby respectively declared that neither they who subscribed that Approbation prefixed to Mr Williams his Book did therein more than signifie as their own words express That they judged he had in all that was material fully and rightly stated the Truths and Errors this wants proof in a high Paper of Agreem p. 2. degree therein mentioned as such without delivering their sense about the Preface Explications or Proofs thereunto belonging which Declaration is not to be esteemed as a Disapproval of the said Preface Explications or Proofs Nor they who with Mr. Chancy subscribed the above-said Paper did therein offer any particular Exceptions which is a bold falshood against the said state of Truths and Errors which yet is not to be understood as an Approval of that state of Truth and Errors Now Reader consider here are Articles subscribed unto by Persons of several and very distinct Judgments which plainly appears from their stedfast adherence unto what they had written notwithstanding this form of an Agreement for that which they have subscribed unto must either be of an indifferent nature and consequently a Medium of Reconciliation between them or else must be obsolutely decisive of the Controversie on the one hand or the other and so long as things are thus agitated in the Dark my best Advice unto thee is to compare the Subscribed Articles with the Treatises writ by each Party and by the help of the Spirit of the Lord thou wilt quickly come to know not only where Truth does ly but also the various interwoven Cheats by which some Persons would carry on their wretched and unconscionable designs this day The Lord give thee understanding in all things FINIS The Reader is desired to Correct these following Errata's or any other with his Pen. INtroduct Page 2. Line 18. read won't for would p. 3. l. 26. r. cast down for cast us p. 2. l. 2. r. it s for it l. 19. r. as for ae p. 7. l. 15. r. into the state for in the state ibid. l. 39. r. this Doctor for thy Doctor p. 13. l. 38. r. Sacrifice for Sanctifie p. 14. l. 23. r. Surreptitious for Surreptatious ibid. l. 37. r. He that hath for He hath p. 22. l. 27. r. make it for for it p. 25. l. 6. r. hence l. 45. r. of God for for God p. 27. l. 36. r. but to drive