Selected quad for the lemma: world_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
world_n	death_n	sin_n	sin_v	14,462	5	10.3751	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A55108	A plea for the late accurate and excellent Mr. Baxter and those that speak of the sufferings of Christ as he does. In answer to Mr. Lobb's insinuated charge of Socinianism against 'em, in his late appeal to the Bishop of Worcester, and Dr. Edwards. With a preface directed to persons of all persuasions, to call 'em from frivolous and over-eager contentions about words, on all sides.	Lobb, Stephen, d. 1699.; Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1699 (1699)	Wing P2521; ESTC R217330	67,965	145

require only that either Christ or we shou'd suffer not that both shou'd now then where is the danger the Psalmist was so apprehensive of And whence is it that he does elsewhere so earnestly deprecate God's Judicial Process Psal 143. 2. Enter not into judgment with thy servant for in thy sight shall no man living be justify'd It must needs be either that the Psalmist or these Men have very greatly misapprehended the Sense of that Law for that according to him if God shou'd judge us by that Law no man living cou'd be justify'd whereas according to them though God shou'd judge us by that Law we cannot but be Justify'd for when the threatned Penalty is inflicted the most rigorous Justice can go no further we are Recti in Curia when the Law is satisfy'd no further charge can have place against us 3. Yea further it follows That we never had as indeed we cou'd never need a Pardon The Case will be very plain by a familiar Instance Suppose two Persons jointly bound for the Payment of a certain Sum of Money or for the performance of any other Condition or Contract if either Party pay the Money or discharge the Bond the other is quit in Law and the Creditor cannot be said to have forgiven him Justice it self is so far from requiring that it wou'd not admit of double Payment Now then if Christ was in the same Bond with us if either He or we suffer the Debt is Paid the utmost Demands of Justice are answer'd what place is there then left for Forgiveness Can a Penalty be said to be forgiven that was not due or can it be yet due when 't is already paid and is it not in Law paid if either the Principal or Surety pay it Upon this Principle then it is plain That God cannot be said to have forgiven us to have been gracious to us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For tho' Socinus did as Grotius has manifested Argue from those Terms with great weakness against all Satisfaction yet nothing can with greater force and evidence disprove a full and proper Solution What shall we then say to those numerous Texts where we and our Sins are said to be forgiven Hereupon the Gospel-Covenant as offering Remission Luke 24. 47. and the Sacraments of the Gospel as Sealing it to Sincerely Penitent Believers Acts 2. 38. Mat. 26. 28. are render'd meer Impertinencies and can it be thought these Persons do ever pray for Pardon or that they do account themselves beholden to God for it how they can consistently with this their Opinion I see not 4. Moreover this Doctrine renders our Repentance and all Obedience of our's needless and a continued course of the most enormous wickednesses wou'd hereupon be unhurtful to us If these Persons will be consistent with themselves it seems necessary for 'em to say as Dr. Crisp that Sin can do us no hurt and Holiness can do us no good Upon this Principle what hurt can Sin the grossest wickedness do us Suppose a Person an Atheist a Blasphemer an Adulterer that he live and die such in this case it can only be said The Law was violated and therefore the Threatning must take place But if this Notion be true that the Law threatens only that either the Sinner or Christ shall die it cannot touch such a Creature as this it having been already executed And alike needless must it needs render Holiness and Obedience in all the Instances of it for to what purpose is it can it be suppos'd to be needful if he may be accepted with God if he may be Rectus in curia without it 5. Again If this Principle be admitted none of our sufferings wou'd consist with the Justice of God for that according to them the Law did oblige only Christ or us to suffer if either suffer therefore full Payment is made the Law has no farther demands to make how is it then that we notwithstanding suffer that we are subjected to any Sufferings Spiritual or Temporal not to make any mention here of Eternal ones Whence is it that God with-draws the Quickning or Comforting Influences of his Spirit from any Whence is it that He gives up any to their own Hearts Lusts Whence is it that any are expos'd to the fiery Darts of the wicked one Or yet that the Arrows of the Almighty do wound do stick fast in any Soul Or if we shou'd yet come lower how unaccountable were it that we shou'd groan under pining Sicknesses noisom Diseases racking Pains and at length yield to Death It will perhaps be pleaded That God may inflict all these Evils and many more at pleasure as being Absolute Lord of his Creatures but it shou'd be remembred That having given us a Law He is become our Ruler and thereby He does declare That He will not however antecedently thereto He might have Arbitrarily inflicted any Evil upon us The very giving out a Law in and by which it is Enacted That such certain Evils shall be inflicted upon the Transgressors of it how plainly does it indemnifie-the Non-violaters of it from such Sufferings Such Threatnings otherwise cou'd answer no End if it were intended That whether they violated the Law or not they shou'd be alike obnoxious Now if we consider God as a Governour the Evils He inflicts come under another Consideration they are not meerly Afflictions or Sufferings but they are also Punishments and therefore they are not dispens'd Arbitrarily but according to a Stated Rule He does not punish any but such as by the Law are obnoxious hence is it that we read of his Righteousness in Reference to this Matter And as this does more generally evince That all Evils inflicted by a Ruler as such are Punishments so with Reference to the particular Instances above-mention'd it might be distinctly made appear that they are in the most strict and proper Sense Punishments In the last which is not the least doubted Case how plain is it that the Separation of Soul and Body is Penal that 't is a natural Evil no one doubts as such 't is abhorr'd of all and that 't is inflicted for or by reason of Sin is as unquestionable if the Apostle's account of the Matter may be allow'd for so he tells us Rom. 5. 12. By one man sin enter'd into the world and death by sin and so death passed upon all men for that all have sinn'd So that Death amongst Men has the nature of a Punishment in it but how then comes it to be inflicted if it be not due If we be not obnoxious to the Sentence of the Law it cannot be said to be due to us if the Threatning was disjunctive both Parties Bound cou'd not be obnoxious if Sentence be executed on either the other is clear how comes it then that we are punish'd and Christ too What shall we say Is God unrighteous that taketh vengeance Rom. 3. 5. Or is not this rather an unrighteous Doctrine that wou'd reflect

yet again Crimes unpunish'd are too much countenanc'd at least if they be not thereby authoriz'd We see the meer delay of Punishment is very frequently abus'd to this purpose Eccles 8. 11. Because Sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in 'em to do evil And if meer Forbearance have this effect what may we suppose wou'd have been the consequence of absolute Forgiveness So that we conclude GOD cou'd not consistently with either his own Honour or our Safety Pardon Sin without a Satisfaction it was necessary that Sufferings shou'd be insisted on and such Sufferings as shou'd be Equivalent to what was Threatned Sufferings that were adapted to answer the ends of the Law and Government as well or better than the Sufferings of Sinners themselves Hereupon IV. In order to our Remission the Sufferings of Christ were insisted on by the Father and agreed to by the Son by his Sufferings it was effected brought to pass that Sin might be remitted without either reflecting any Dishonour upon GOD or in the least encouraging any to Sin His Sufferings did fully answer all the Exigencies of our Case and therefore this Constitution is mention'd by the Apostle as a very condecent and becoming one Heb. 2. 10. Supposing so Gracious an Intendment towards us That GOD design'd to put us into the Hand of Christ that He might bring us to Glory it was what well became God to make the Captain of our Salvation perfect through Sufferings But what Condecency or Becomingness wou'd there have been in it if Sin might have been pardon'd and the Sinner sav'd as well without it Nay the Death of Christ was therefore insisted on that thereby GOD's Justice might be demonstrated Rom. 3. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 't is doubled to give it the greater Emphasis GOD would have been Just and sufficiently have demonstrated himself to be so if He had infficted upon us the Vengeance that was threatned but supposing that He Pardon us that He Justifie Sinners though Penitent Believers his Justice might well be call'd in Question unless Satisfaction be first made for our Sins therefore does the Apostle so industriously urge and inculcate this over and over as what he would not by any means have overlook'd Christ therefore was a Propitiatory-Sacrifice that GOD's Justice might be demonstrated that it might clearly be demonstrated to the World and the next Words rise yet higher 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that He might be and not only that He might appear to be the Just as if upon the supposal of his Justifying Sinners He cou'd not otherwise be Just So that though meer Remission wou'd have well consisted with Mercy alone or the Damnation of all Apostate Sinners with Justice alone yet if GOD wou'd be merciful to Sinners He must also be Just and that He cou'd not be unless He so far and in such a way punish Sin as will suffice to keep up his own Honour and Authority and effectually to discourage Sin And hence it was that Christ became the Propitiation for our Sins Wherefore V. And in the last place The Sufferings of Christ being thus insisted on in order to his being a Successful Mediator with GOD for Sinners He is therefore said to have died for us and for our Sins Our Sins render'd Suffering necessary GOD thereupon insists on Suffering without shedding of Blood He will allow no Remission Hereupon Christ consents to die and accordingly dies a Sacrifice for us bears our sins carries our griefs c. Sect. 5. And this is that relation betwixt our Sins and the Sufferings of Christ which is intended to be express'd by Grotius and others when they say Our Sins were the Meritorious Cause of his Sufferings i. e. they deserv'd Death and so bound us over to it as that we cou'd not be exempted from it without a Satisfaction without some-what Equivalent to our dying in which Exigency Christ dies for us I cannot find that they or which with every Christian surely shou'd yet be of greater weight that the Scriptures themselves do mean any thing more Thus Grotius Causa altera quae Deum movit sunt peccata nostra paenam commerentia He does not mean that they deserv'd Christ shou'd be punished but they so bound us over to Punishment that unless Christ die for 'em we cou'd not Salva Divinae Justitiae demonstratione a paena mortis aeternae liberari as he had a few Lines before expressed himself And therefore having mention'd that Text a few Pages forward Gal. 2. 21. If righteousness be by the law then Christ died 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without a cause he adds Locus ipse Pauli de quo agimus aliam quam antecedentem causam intelligi non patitur And a little further adds Causam propriam cur se tradiderit Christus mortuusque sit hanc esse quod nos per legem justi non essemus sed rei paenae nostra ergo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 causa est antecedens mortis Christi To which he adds p. 36. Non potest alicujus actionis causa impellens esse Meritoria nisi finis sit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And cap. 5. p. 113 114. Merebantur peccata nostra ut paena exigeretur quod vero paena in Christum collata fuerit hoc ita ad Dei Christi voluntatem referimus ut ea quoque voluntas causas suas habeat non in Merito Christi qui peccatum cum non nosset a Deo peccatum factus est sed in summa Christi aptitudine ad statuendum insigne exemplum c. So that whoever allows that our Sins deserv'd Punishment and so bound us over to Eternal Death as that we cou'd not be exempted from it with safety to the Divine Justice unless Satisfaction be made that Christ died for this end by satisfying Divine Justice to procure our Remission and that his Death therefore was antecedently thus caused by our Sin and was inflicted for an example to deterr us from Sin I say whoever agrees to this so far as I can find admits of all that Grotius ever design'd when he calls our Sins the meritorious Cause of Christ's Sufferings And so also the Bishop of Worcester Our Sins as an Impulsive Cause are to be consider'd as they are so displeasing to GOD that it was necessary for the Vindication of his Honour and the deterring the World from Sin that no less a Sacrifice of Atonement shou'd be offer'd than the Blood of the Son of GOD. Sect. 6. And to all this we do readily agree yea how fully has Mr. Baxter spoken to this Sense particularly in his Reasons of the Christian Religion Part I. Cap. 15. Sect. 9. P. 161 162 163. So also Part II. c. 4. § 6. P. 232. and c. 5. § 10. P. 253 254. The Passages are too large to Transcribe But he has there very plainly intimated That GOD neither has nor cou'd Pardon Sinners

without such a Sacrifice or substitute-means as might preserve the Honour of his Law and Government and the future Innoceney of his Subjects as well as their Punishment in the full Sense of the Law wou'd have done Sect. 7. Now when the whole Matter or Thing is agreed to all that the Orthodox intend by that Phrase 't is a very insipid thing for any one vehemently to contend what Word or Name to call it by What if one call our Sins the Meritorious Cause another the Promeritorious Cause another the Occasion of Christ's Sufferings whilst they are all agreed as to the Reference they had to 'em But if any one by a Meritorious Cause intend more than what is abovesaid or by an Occasion intend less it may with just Reason be concluded they are mistaken with the Antinomians in the one or with the Socinians in the other Extream Sect. 8. We blame no one therefore meerly for calling our Sins the Meritorious Cause of Christ's Sufferings nay Mr. Baxter himself sometimes calls 'em so the Meritorious or Pro-meritorious Cause Confession of Faith p. 153. the Remote or assum'd Cause Life of Faith p. 311. and p. 321. he allows that our sins lay on Christ as the assum'd Meritorious cause of his Sufferings So in his Methodus Theologiae Ad peccatum Relationem habent speaking of the Sufferings of Christ ut ad occasionem ut ad causam meritoriam remotam si non proximam P. III. c. 1. Determ 5. p. 38. And in that other Book to which our Accuser refers us he thus expresses his Sense at his very entring upon this Point When He Christ is said to die for our Sins it may be understood for our Sins as the Pro-meritorious procuring Cause of his Suffering through his own Undertaking to bear what they deserv'd Or if any think it fitter to call 'em the Occasion than the Meritorious Cause they may Universal Redempt p. 5. And the very last Words that I have observ'd him to use of this Matter in that last-mention'd Tract are these The strictest Sense in which He Christ is said to die for Men is to die in their stead or to die for their Sins as the Procuring Cause on his own Undertaking yield this once and we shall much easiler agree c. Ibid. p. 91. Which Two Passages do so inclose and explicate all the rest that for a Person to represent any of the intermediate Passages to adiffering and disadvantageous Sense is what deserves a Censure so severe as we did not think fit to express otherwise than by a significant Silence Sect. 9. But though we allow others their Liberty yet accurately speaking it must be said That all that Reference that our Sins had to the Sufferings of Christ does not amount to a Proper Meritorious Cause Nor did Grotius ever think it did whatever our Accuser may imagine For though he does affirm as is intimated Appeal p. 6. that Praeter Dei Christi voluntatem datur Causa Antecedens Legitima mortis Christi yet he distinguishes once and again betwixt Punishment taken Personally and taken Impersonally By Punishment taken Personally he intends the Sufferings of Christ consider'd as his by Punishment taken Impersonally he means the Sufferings of Christ consider'd only as Sufferings And he expresly tells us That our Sins were only the Meritorious Cause of the Sufferings of Christ in this latter Sense For thus he speaks Illud quoque reprehensione indiget quod dicit Socinus Praeter Dei ipsius Christi voluntatem non posse ullam legitimam Causam reddi mortis Christi nisi dicamus Christum meritum fuisse ut moreretur Nam inest quidem in antecedente Causa meritum ut supra diximus sed Impersonaliter merebantur enim peccata nostra ut paena exigeretur c. Cap. 5. p. 113. Our Sins only did deserve Sufferings and those of such a value and cou'd not be remitted unless such a Compensation was made to Divine Justice for 'em but they never did deserve that Christ should die they made it necessary supposing we be Redeem'd that it be by such a Price but they did not deserve that we shou'd be Redeem'd with his Precious Blood All that Grotius asserts is That Death was deserv'd he no where says that Christ's Death was so § 10. And this is the true Reason why we are not fond of the Phrase a Meritorious Cause because it wou'd intimate Christ's Sufferings were deserv'd Now if they were deserv'd it must either be allow'd that they were the very thing that the Law threatned or we by our Sins deserv'd God shou'd Save and Ransom us by such Sufferings If either of these be true our Sins may then be said to be the Meritorious the proper meritorious Cause of Christ's Sufferings as our Accuser wou'd have 'em but cannot be strictly and truly so otherwise than upon the one or the other of these Principles In that they deserv'd such Sufferings for weight and cou'd not be remitted without such Sufferings and Christ hereupon consented to suffer for 'em they may be call'd the Meritorious Cause of his Sufferings or much more fitly the ground the reason the assum'd cause the pro-meritorious or quasi-meritorious Cause of his Sufferings But the real proper meritorious Cause of 'em they cou'd not be unless they in a strict and proper Sense deserv'd that Christ shou'd die Now the Death of Christ is considerable under a two-fold Notion either as a Curse or Blessing As inflicted upon Him 't was a most dreadful Curse As it was our Ransom the Price of our Redemption it was and is a most invaluable Blessing If our Sins therefore deserv'd the Death of Christ it must be either in the one or the other of these Respects But no one surely will dare to say That our Sins deserv'd such a Ransom that GOD in giving his Son to be the Saviour of the World gave us no more than we deserv'd this were egregious Blasphemy against the brightest and most amazing Instance of Love with which God ever bless'd the World § 11. It remains then that supposing our Sins the Proper Meritorious Cause of Christ's death they did deserve it as a Curse to be inflicted upon Him tho' not as a Blessing influential upon us And 't is not conceivable how our Sins cou'd so deserve the death of Christ unless this be suppos'd to be the very thing threatned in the Law if thou sinnest Christ shall die And this our Accuser sometimes seems to intend what else can he possibly mean when he tells us Appeal p. 25. If Christ's Obligation to suffer did not result from this Law i. e. the Law which we had violated our Sins were not the Impulsive Cause of his Sufferings Or if it did not immediately our Sins were but the Remote Cause or Occasion not a meer Impulsive or Proper Meritorious Cause of ' em And p. 50. If Christs Sufferings be not ex obligatione Legis we suppose he means the

reason cannot possibly be GOD. Now this Justice of GOD not only has place in the conferring Promised Rewards but also in the executing threatned Penalties Of the former no one makes a doubt 't is the latter therefore that only needs to be clear'd And how plain is it that even the Punishment of Sin is still mention'd as an Act of Justice Rom. 3. 8. 2. 5. 2 Thess 1. 6. Heb. 2. 2. Rev. 16. 5. 7. 19. 2. But though in the nature of the thing and from these Texts it is most evident That when GOD punishes Sin He does it justly it may yet be a doubtful Case with some Whether or how far his Justice obliges Him to punish it And that it does oblige Him in some Cases surely shou'd be agreed for that we cannot form a Notion of Rectoral Justice that does not import and carry in it a difference betwixt the Righteous and the Wicked in its Distributions it will not admit that all be alike treated The Wise Man therefore complains of this as one of the great Evils of our World That there be Righteous Men to whom it happens according to the work of the Wicked and wicked Men to whom it happens according to the work of the Righteous Eccles 8. 14. But is certain it shall not at last be well with 'em v. 13. GOD has declar'd this Justifying the Wicked in Humane Judicatures to be an abomination to Him Prov. 17. 15. and has accordingly denounc'd a Woe against it Isa 5. 23. and therefore surely it can have no place with Him Besides that in reference to Himself we are assur'd that He is no Respecter of Persons in Judgment Rom. 2. 11. which Text is the more considerable for that the Apostle does there alledge this as an Argument to Evince That GOD will render to every man according to his works and thereby manifest his Judgment to be Righteous v. 5. 6. Intimating that his Justice does consist therein viz. In rendring to every one according to his works his Justice obliges Him thereto Now that we may not mistakingly imagine that He intends it only of the good that is their due He carefully distinguishes betwixt Good and bad and applies this Exercise of Justice to both Not only will He as Justice obliges Him render glory honour and peace to every man that worketh good but also as the same Justice obliges tribulation and anguish upon every Soul of Man that does evil ver 9. 10. Not upon one or two but every one for there is no respect of persons with GOD. And to give this yet the greater force we find it conjoyn'd with the denial of any Iniquity in GOD 2 Chron. 19. 7. There is no iniquity with the Lord our God nor respect of persons Signifying thereby That shou'd GOD as a Ruler deal unequally with Persons whose cases are the same or deal alike with Persons whose cases are differing either of which ways there wou'd be a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Respect of Persons He wou'd be chargeable with Iniquity 'T is as certain therefore that GOD cannot but severely Animadvert upon Sin as that there can be no Iniquity in Him But what need we further Proof while Crellius himself owns it That the Justice of God in some cases oblige Him to punish Nec illud negamus rectitudinem ac justitiam Dei nonnunquam eum ad peccata punienda movere eorum nempe c. Quales sunt homines non-resipiscentes atque in peccatis contumaciter perseverantes c. Maxime si ipsum peccati Genus in quo persistunt insignem animi malitiam aut apertum Divinae Majestatis contemptum spiret And he not only grants this which yet as we may hereafter make appear does plainly infer the whole of what he had been pleading against but he does also nervously prove it in the immediately following Words Si enim hujusmodi hominibus venia concederetur facile supremi Rectoris Majestas ex qua Ordo Universitatis pendet Legum ab ipso latarum Authoritas evilesceret gloria ipsius quae praecipuus operum ejus finis est minueretur To the same purpose he speaks again Non resipiscentes paena non liber are Positis quibusdam finibus quos Deus sibi in regendis hominibus prefixit factu necessarium c. Now upon these Concessions of Crellius it may be inferr'd That supposing GOD to rule us by his Laws we must conceive of Him as necessarily oblig'd to punish the Impenitent But why is He so necessitated to punish That the Honour of his Majesty and the Authority of his Law may be maintain'd And that Principle as we may call it that in God which obliges Him for these Ends to punish the Impenitent the Contumacious he allows to be his Justice Now therefore if Crellius will consist with himself I think he needs must own that unless GOD Govern the World so as to attain the great Ends of Government he would not be Just and that those Ends cannot be attain'd unless Sin be punish'd will easily be made appear if any one shou'd make a doubt of it but the further Consideration of this is more properly to be reserv'd till we meet with it in the Second Part of this Discourse In the mean time let it be observ'd how far we have proceeded and these things seem to be very plain viz. That GOD is in a most proper Sense the Governour of Intelligent Creatures That as such He is most necessarily Just That his Justice does respect the Distribution of Rewards and Punishments and that however in Reference either to Rewards or Punishments it may not always oblige Him to execute strictly what the very Letter of the Law imports yet will it not admit either in reference to the one or other of any such Relaxation or Change as wou'd not well consist with and secure the great Ends of Threatnings or Promises This Governing Justice therefore was a further Bar in the way of a meer Pardon GOD could not consistently herewith absolutely Pardon If the very Penalty threatned be not inflicted Justice it self requir'd that an Equivalent should i. e. such Sufferings as should as well attain the ends of the Law as the threatned Penalty it self should Thus in respect of GOD his Honour the Honour of his Power Wisdom Holiness and Governing Justice did necessarily require that if GOD Pardon the Sinner He should yet one way or other leave such marks of his displeasure upon Sin as shou'd as effectually support the Authority and secure the Ends of his Government as if the Sinner himself had suffer'd according to the utmost rigour of the Law And in reference also To the Latter Thing mention'd i. e. That we be discourag'd and affrighted from Sinning in order thereto it was alike necessary that Sin shou'd with great Severity be animadverted on if no Punishment was inflicted or none proportion'd to the Offence what shou'd keep the World in awe or make 'em afraid of Sinning