Selected quad for the lemma: world_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
world_n	live_v	present_a	ungodliness_n	2,099	5	11.1926	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65863	The divinity of Christ and unity of the three that bear record in heaven with the blessed end and effects of Christ's appearance, coming in the flesh, suffering and sacrifice for sinners, confessed and vindicated, by his followers, called Quakers : and the principal matters in controversie, between them, and their present opposers (as Presbyterians, Independants, &c.) considered and resolved, according to the scriptures of truth, and more particularly to remove the aspersions ... cast upon the ... Quakers ... in several books, written by Tho. Vincent, Will. Madox, their railing book, stil'd The foundation, &c, Tho. Danson, his Synopsis, John Owen, his Declaration / which are here examin'd and compared by G.W. ... ; as also, a short review of several passages of Edward Stillingfleet's ... in his discourse of the sufferings of Christ's and sermon preached before the King, wherein he flatly contradicts the said opposers.	Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723.	1669 (1669)	Wing W1925; ESTC R19836	166,703	202

make man righteous as his condemning Sin in the Flesh was that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us that walk not after the Flesh but after the Spirit which righteousness fulfilled in us T. D. formerly said was to be meant in Christ's Person and not in ours by which likewise he hath both excluded man from the real enjoyment of Christ and his Righteousness and from that obedience and sanctity which he requires and answers the end of his coming and manifestation and by this means the Professors have made the Law and Commands and Teachings of God ineffectual as to the Creature whilst Christ only is made the subject of them and not man and this gives a liberty to people to live in sin all their time and to pervert Gods Laws and neglect the teachings of his Grace and vainly to excuse themselves in their disobedience like as T. D. hath done as where the Grace of God and his pure Law requires perfect obedience from us and that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts and that we should live godly righteously and soberly in this present world now if any man should say that this was not intended to us but to Christ as if God did require him to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts to forsake all sin and live righteously when he never did nor could sin nor had the Prince of the world any thing in him this would be a strange put off and gross perversion of the Law of God to lay it all upon Christ and put it from themselves whereas Christ's Example is perfectly to be followed and where he is manifest and his Life brought forth in man there is a conformity to his Heavenly Image and not a living in sin nor to the lusts of the world but to the Will of God Pag. 42. But as to T. D's confessing to the Creditors cancelling the B●nd letting the Debtor out of Prison giving a legal Discharge upon the Sureties payment of the Debt as he could have done upon his personal payment First Hereupon I do enquire if man that hath been in Prison and bondage under sin and corruption be let out of that Prison upon Christ's Obedience if he be then he must not remain in personal bondage all his life time from partaking of Christs Righteousness and Obedience for if he be released from the servitude of sin and be let out of that bondage then he is made free from it by the Law of the Spirit of Life to serve obey and walk in the Law of Righteousness by Faith and this is not an imagined fixion or conceit of Freedom or Justification whilst people are in real bondage which your Doctrine tends to keep people in Though it be true as amongst men that the Act of one Person may by contract or Act of Law become the Act of another as the Sureties payment of the Debt is accepted for the Debtor yet in this case it doth not reach the real and full intent of Christ's Coming Obedience and Righteousness which is to bring man into his Image and to fulfil the righteousness of the Law in man that he may follow his Steps and have the same Mind Spirit and Righteousness in him that was in Christ that he may walk after his Example in all purity and holiness of conversation Yet so far as releasement out of Prison is imported in the comparison or any thing tending to a real Deliverance of the Creature out of Sin and Corruption and so from Condemnation it may be admitted of so for then it contradicts their pleading for sin and imperfection term of life and surely God doth not legally declare any to be righteous whilst his Spirit and Law within reproves them for sin and declares them unrighteous for God and his Spirit do not contradict one another neither doth God declare people to be out of Prison whilst they are really in bondage to their sins lusts and vanities as the carnal Priests and Professors have falsly done but the Liberty which Christ proclaims to the Captives is really to be injoyed and received by every one that believes and receives him his Message and Testimony And this is not a false Imputation or an imagined Application of Righteousness and Freedom to People in their personal bondage of Sin and Corruption such as T. D. and such false Guides have led people into And that of Ezek. 18.20 the Son shall not bear the iniquity of the Father T.D. saith Imports Gods gracious recession from his right because of their more then ordinary Audacity in charging his Ways with inequality This is his false construction For God sheweth his Way to be equal vers 25 26 27. which is no recession from his right as his condemning such as turn from righteousness and Justifying and giving Life to such as turn from wickedness for both Graciousness Mercy and Judgement are his right and he rewardeth every man in Righteousness according to the Equality of his Wayes T. D. Nor doth God Justifie what is opposite to his pure Nature in Justifying a person who in himself is impure upon the righteousness of another imputed to him Reply Is not a person that is in himself impure opposite to God's pure Nature Surely purity and impurity are opposite and whilst the impure Person is rendred the subject of Justification upon another's righteousness imputed he then it seems is accounted pure by T. D. and not opposite to God's pure Nature though he be personally impure but surely God doth not then account him pure whilst in impurity for God cannot lye nor account as the Wicked and Hypocrites do who are pure in their own eyes though not washed from their filthiness and here we may see T. D. and his Brethrens false notion and conception of Imputation and Justification and how contrary it is to Justum facere which the word Justifie signifieth as by him before confest viz. to make Just when now he falsly renders an impure person not opposite to the pure Nature of God from his notion of Imputation and Justification in that state Pag. 44. Arg. 3. Sin came not by Imputation but by actual Transgression This is laid down as the Quakers To which T. D. Answers The sin of Adam was made his Posterities by Imputation Rom. 5.12 14. Adam was a common Root of Mankind by nature Reply Herein hath he perverted the Scripture which doth not say that the Sin of Adam was made his Posterities by Imputation neither doth he hereby prove his notion of Imputation of Righteousness to impure persons for sure he cannot prove that all Adam's Posterity were pure and sin not actually theirs but only imputed to them whilst not partakers of it this is contradictory and as false as their Imputation of Righteousness and Justification to men whilst unjust but the Scripture he mentions Rom. 5.12 saith As by one man Sin entred into the World and Death by Sin so Death past upon all men for that all have sinned mark that for

with the full bent of his will as do the wicked because he is born of God Doth not this reflect upon that pure Relation he hath with the Father and so upon the Nature of God for begetting and bringing forth such an impure birth And is not this to frustrate the end of the Son of God in being made manifest to destroy the works of the Devil whereas he that abides in Christ sinneth not see further 1 Joh. 3.5 6 7 8 9 10 verses 2. Whereas T. V. his contrary meaning to plain Scripture accuseth the Apostle John and others that were born again with committing sin from that chap. 1. vers 8. that doth not prove it against John and such as he hath so accused whereby he hath rendred John to be of the Devil for he that commits sin is so 1 Joh. 3.8 no more then James his saying With the same Tongue bless we God and curse we men doth prove himself to be one that so cursed which he said ought not to be for John writes to divers states and degrees of growth as to them that had sin to be cleansed from that they might walk in the Light to know the Blood of Christ to cleanse them from all sin vers 7. As also he said If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness vers 9. Surely John was come further then a Confession of sin at that time besides having sin may relate either to a former state or to its besetting the Creature in the temptations when it is warred against and in the Faith withstood in its motions in order to a Conquest when the Creature doth not commit sin but withstands it as Paul said It s not I that sinneth so that having some sin and committing sin are two things for it doth not appear that the beloved Disciple or Apostle John was a committer of sin in that state when he wrote that Epistle for he saith vers 10. If we say we have not sinned we make him a lyar and his word is not in us which relates to a state that was past If we say we have not sinned is not all one as to say if we say we do not commit sin c. Yet he saith chap. 2.1 My little Children these things I write unto you that ye sin not Now had John been of T. V's perswasion that such a state of Perfection or not Sinning is not here attainable why should he exhort them not to sin and so plainly shew the difference between him that is born of God and him that is of the Devil See 1 Joh. 3. throughout And then as to T. V. his supposed Consequence from our Doctrine of Perfection That whoever found any sin in them were not born of God which I say that its neither our Assertion nor the Consequence of our saying That he that 's born of God doth not commit sin for having sin when it is withstood and warred against by that which is born of God and committing sin are two things yet we know that that which is born of God overcomes the World and this is the Victory even our Faith and the end of Christ's manifestation is to destroy sin that it may not have a being so long as we live in us And T.V. further adds That if they should die with any sin remaining they would certainly go to Hell and so none there yea none in the World would be saved he saith Hereby he still takes it for granted That there 's no such Perfection here as a freedom from all sin but that all God's Children die with sin remaining in them I then ask How long after death shall sin remain and when and where is the time and place of being fully cleansed after death is it in the Grave or is it in some Purgatory For if God's Children must be cleansed after death they must be cleansed somewhere and then in the mean time betwixt death and this supposed time and place of cleansing and purging where lyes the sin and pollution and the stain of it is it in the Soul or in the Body Surely not in the Body when dead neither can the Soul go to God with sin or pollution in it for no unclean thing can enter into his Kingdom or dwell with him so then the Question still remains where the Soul is after death and where is the place of its purging and fully cleansing If T. V. and his Brethren are not Papists let them answer and clear themselves and Principle from the Popes Purgatory T. V. his reviling and calling us Audacious Quakers who have not the least degree of true Grace because of damnable Opinions This his harsh language and railing signifies little to us for any proof against us or what we hold but only shewes his own peevishness and implacable enmity as one vexed and fretted in his mind and so not fit to intermeddle with things of so high concernment as he hath presumptiously attempted to stir in as about Perfection and the Deity and Satisfaction of Christ Justification Righteousness c. nor yet to call and exhort others whilst he himself had need to be called and exhorted to repent of his hard and uncharitable speeches and censours and to come to meekness and moderation which would better become his Profession And his confidence that we have not the least degree of true grace is both a false and uncharitable confidence and charge against us as also his flaunting and jearing W. P. as having but some smattering of Learning and being but little of a Scholar never to have read nor understood Logick or to have forgot or laid it aside Herein hath he manifested himself both scornful and ridiculous to make so much use of his own pretended Learning Arguments Logick Demonstration c. to such as he reckons hath neither true grace nor Learning it appears T.V. had a mind to shew himself in a vain flourish and boasting over such whom he hath endeavoured to render contemptible mean and ignorant as he hath done us all which doth but the more manifest the pride of his heart vain-glorying c. And then he adds I told them that all true Believers were perfect in a sense they were Evangellically perfect but not legally not absolutly perfect they had perfection of parts but not of degrees I Answer What confusion is here and what contradiction to his former Doctrine of Imperfection and Sin in this Life for first an Evangelical Perfection he grants but not a Legal as if either the Law or the state under it were above the Gospel or else that the state of the Gospel is not a state of Perfection exceeding that under the Law but rather inferiour both which are false and absurd For this Doctrine doth not only charge Imperfection upon the Creature under the Gospel but upon the Gospel it self whilst Evangelical Perfection is deemed either Imperfection or not a

those two are made Conditions on our parts in order to the enjoying the benefit of what Christ hath procured so that the Release is not immediate upon the Payment c. Page 272. We are to consider that these very Persons assert That Christ paid all for us and in our name and stead so that the payment by Christ was by a substitution in our room and if he paid the same which the Law required the benefit must immediatly acrue to those in whose Name the Debt was paid for what was done in the Name of another is all one to the Creditor as if it had been done by the Debtor himself But above all things it is impossible to reconcile the freeness of Remission with the full Payment c. Neither will it serve to say That though it was not free to Christ yet it was to us for the Satisfaction and Remission must respect the same person for Christ did not pay for himself but for us neither could the Remission be to him c. It is impossible the same Debt should be fully paid and freely forgiven much less will it avoid the difficulty in this case to say That it was a refusable Payment for it being supposed to be the very same it was not in Justice refusable c. pag. 173. Thus when our Adversaries Dispute against this Opinion no wonder if they do it succesfully but this whole Opinion is built upon a Mistake That Satisfaction must be the payment of the very same which while they contend for they give our Adversaries too great an advantage and make them think they triumph over the Faith of the Church when they do it only over the mistake of some perticular Persons p. 275. They make the right of punishment meerly to depend on God's absolute Dominion and that all Satisfaction must be considered under the notion of Compensation for the injuries done to him But if we can clearly shew a considerable difference between the Notion of Debts and Punishments if the right of Punishments doth not depend upon meer Dominion and that Satisfaction by way of Punishment is not primarily entended for Compensation It is lawful for a man to forgive all the Debts which are owing him althoug they assert That the Justice of God doth never require Punishment in case of Repentance but withal they assert That in case of Impenitency it is not only agreeable but due to the nature and decrees and therefore to the rectitude and equity of God not to give Pardon If this be true then there is an apparent difference between the notion of Debts and Punishments c. Thus far Edw. Stillingfleet Obs. Hereby the Reader may see how contrary to Dr. Owen and T. Danson's Notions of Law Dr. Stillingfleet hath reasoned and hath seemed to shew more Moderation and offer more Reason in his way and method than they have done in these matters These Passages I was willing to Relate that the World may see how Inconsistent and Opposite these Doctors and Learned men so accounted are in their Notions and how they cannot agree among themselves and also what Confusion men are apt to run into when they keep not to the plain language of the Scriptures Besides had the despised Suffering Quakers but appeared as from themselves after this method against J. O. and his Brethren as E. S. hath done what an offence would it have been unto them and how ready would they have been to muster up their Forces and send out their reviling Books against us hoping thereby to gain the more favour and esteem as Defenders of the Faith of the Church c. whereas it is not the Faith of the Church they defend in their mistakes whereby they have obscured the state of the Controversie by managing it with more Zeal than Judgment according to E. S. his words Now they may Answer themselves in their Contradictions and see if they can Reconcile their own Work before they further meddle against others for in the state they are in the more they strive the more they 'l Confound themselves and work their own overthrow As for their Reviling and nick-Names they give men that differ they are but poor Arguments for Confutation when they are rather to prejudice the Ignorant than to manifest Truth Howbeit whatever men's Notions or Opinions be touching Christ or his Sufferings we have not our Religion and Experience thereof from them they being uncertain and weak in comparison of the Living Truth it self which in Christ and his Light is received and not in men's Traditions and Notions And that all may come to know the certain Principle or Light of Christ within to wait in to know the Power of Godliness and those things which concern Life and Salvation This is the desire of my Soul for all such as feel a want of true Satisfaction and Peace in their own Souls Some Passages of Edward Stillingfleet's Sermon Preached before the King March 13. 1666 7. which was Printed by his special command HE who hath appointed the Rewards and Punishments of the great Day will then call the Sinner to Accompt not only for all his other sins but for offering to lay the Imputation of them upon himself We have the greatest reason to lay the blame of all our Evil Actions upon our selves as to attribute the Glory of all our Good unto himself pag. 16 17. b That God had designed they are ready to say That man should lead a life free from sin Why did he confine the Soul of man to a Body so apt to taint and pollute it But who art thou O man that doth find fault with thy Maker c. pag. 17. He hath offered us the assistance of his Grace and of that Spirit of his which is greater then that Spirit which is in the World He hath promised us those Weapons whereby we may withstand the Torrent of Wickedness in the World we have not only sufficient means of Resistance but we understand the Danger before hand pag. 19. Their Consciences still rebuke them sharply for their sins then in a mighty rage and fury they charge God himself with Tyranny as laying impossible Laws upon the Souls of men But if we either consider the Nature of the Command or the Promises which accompany it or the large Experience to the contrary we shall easily discover that this Pretence is altogether unreasonable for what is it that God requires of men as the Condition of their future Happiness which in its own Nature is judged Impossible Is it for men to live Soberly Righteously Godly in this World for that was the end of Christian Religion c. Is it to do as we would be done by Is it to maintain a Universal Kindness and Good Will to men That indeed is the great Excellency of our Religion that it so strictly requires it but if this be impossible farewel all good Nature in the World pag. 21 22.