Selected quad for the lemma: love_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
love_n	beget_v	love_v	only_a	2,697	5	6.4558	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A28344	Vindiciæ foederis, or, A treatise of the covenant of God enterd with man-kinde in the several kindes and degrees of it, in which the agreement and respective differences of the covenant of works and the covenant of grace, of the old and new covenant are discust ... / [by] Thomas Blake ... ; whereunto is annexed a sermon preached at his funeral by Mr. Anthony Burgesse, and a funeral oration made at his death by Mr. Samuel Shaw.	Blake, Thomas, 1597?-1657.; Burgess, Anthony, d. 1664.; Shaw, Samuel, 1635-1696.	1658 (1658)	Wing B3150; ESTC R31595	453,190	558

be greater cannot be determined but when man fell mankinde wholly was lost and unlesse grace save must everlastingly perish As some with the lost Angels must be objects on whom God will glorifie his justice Matth. 25. 41. So others must be vessels of mercy on whom his free grace shall be seen to make them as the Angels of heaven Therefore love is assigned as the alone impulsory motive God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten sonne John 3. 16. God who is rich in mercy according to the great love wherewith he loved us when we were dead in sinne Eph. 2. 5. Of this all that expect to be saved by grace must be tender that it be not obscured Gods designe being to advance it our care must be that it be not lessened In this exercise of free grace God yet keeps up authority and rule power and dominion still is his Man was made of God subject to a Law and under dominion having the law written in his heart from the Creation and he was not divested of it by Adams fall nor yet delivered from it by Christs Redemption Corvinus indeed in his Reply to Moulin cap. 8. sect 7. saith That men under an obligation to punishment are not under any obligation to obedience God will not be served by that man that hath violated his Covenant giving his reason of this assertion To be admitted to serve is a to token of favour which is not vouchsafed as he sayes to menunder guilt and wrath But this is a manifest errour Mans guilt can never rob God of his Sovereignty nor yet disingage man from his duty Standing right with God he is bound to homage Under guilt he is bound both to homage and punishment and to be admitted to serve is not meerly of favour but of dominion and power It was no great favour that Israel in Egypt found in the service of Pharaoh to serve with acceptance is indeed a favour but necessity and duty ties all that are under Sovereignty As man fallen in right is a subject though in his demeanour a rebel So in his regenerate estate still he ows subjection When God became a Saviour to the Elect of mankind he did not cease to be a Sovereigne The children of a King and Emperour know their father to be their Sovereign as by one is well observed The child of God knows God in Christ to be his Lord We are redeemed not to licentiousnesse not to a state of manumission from the command of God but to serve in righteousnesse and true holinesse all the dayes of our life Luke 1. 74. It can be no part of our Christian freedome to be from under the Sovereignty of heaven This Sovereignty of God is two wayes held forth unto us First in keeping up his commandments the power and vigour of his precepts Secondly in his exercise of discipline in chastisement and correction Here I shall assert three things First God in the days of the Gospel keeps up the power and authority of his Law the Obligation of it is still in force to binde the consciences of beleevers Secondly That this Law which God thus keeps up in force is a perfect and compleat rule to those to whom it is given Thirdly That this Law binds as given by the hand of Moses As to the first when I speak thus of the Obligation of the Law I hope I scarce need to tell in what sense I do take the Law Not in the largest sense for any doctrine instruction or Ordinance of any kinde whatsoever Men have their Laws and Directories but I have to deal with the Law of God Neither do I take it for the whole of the Word of God all his will revealed in his Word as it is taken Isa 2. 3. The Law shall go forth of Zion and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem Nor yet as it is taken for all the Scripture of the Old Testament as in that Text of the Apostle In the Law it is written by men of other tongues and by other languages I will speak to this people 1 Cor. 14. 21. Nor yet for the five books of Moses as it is taken in the words of Christ All must be fulfilled that was written in the Law of Moses Luke 24. 44. Neither do I here understand the Ceremonial Law which stood up as a partition between Jew and Gentile Ephes 2. 14. All that did binde the Jews and was not of force from God with the Gentiles is taken off from Christians There was a confession of guilt a beast needed not to have been slain if they had been innocent this held them under hopes that there was sacrifice to take away sinne imposed on the Jewes till the time of reformation Heb. 9. 10. as an Appendix to the first Table fitted to the Jewes state and condition as a shadow of good things to come Heb. 10. 1. Nor yet the judicial Law given to order the Common-wealth or State of that people farther then so much of it as was of nature and then did bind the Gentiles It is the Moral-Law that I meane that Law which was obligatory not only to the Jews but Gentiles for breach of which they suffered Levit. 18. 27 28. Neither do I understand the Moral Law as a covenant upon observation of which life was expected and might be claimed This is utterly inconsistent with the Gospel If there had been a Law that could have given life verily righteousnesse had been by the Law Gal. 3. 21. And this righteousnesse giving life utterly overthrows the Gospel If righteousnesse come by the Law then Christ is dead in vain Gal. 2. 21. In which sense I deny that the Jewes were ever under the Law The Law was not given as such a covenant as shall God willing be shewn So the Moral Law and Ceremonial Law should militate one against another The Moral Law holding them in themselves looking for a righteousnesse of works and the Ceremonial Law leading them out of themselves unto a sacrifice for remission of sinne Abraham was under no such covenant he had the Gospel preached to him Gal. 3. 8. and so had the seed of Abraham But it still hath the nature of a Law binding to obedience it is for ever a rule for the guide of our wayes That it was once of force is without question and above all contradiction and therefore I need not to multiply Old Testament● Scriptures for it There is no repeale of it it was never antiquated and abolished therefore it is of force Though a Law be urged yet if a repeal may be pleaded there is a discharge That it is not repealed I shall shew and further that it is not capable of any repeal If it be repealed then either by Christ at his coming in the flesh or else by his Apostles by commission from him after the Spirit was given But neither Christ in person nor the Apostles by any commission

he 1 There is a passive receiving of Christ You will say saith my Authour what is passive receiving of Christ I answer saith he A passive receiving of Christ is just such a receiving of him as when a froward Patient takes a purge or some bitter physick he shuts his teeth against it but the Physician forceth his mouth open and poures it downe his throat and so it works against his will by the ever-ruling power of one over him that knows it is good for him Thus I say there is a passive recipiency or receiving of Christ which is the first receiving of him when Christ comes by the gift of the Father to a person whilest he is in the stubornesse of his own heart 2 There is an active receiving of him c. This distinction carries a full contradiction in it self There cannot be in the same subject a meere passive and active recipie cy of the same thing as appeares in the similitude brought to illustrate it This froward Patient that hath a medicine forced into him in which he is meerly passive cannot again afterward receive that medicine If Christ be th●s forced and enters against our will then we cannot actively at any time after receive him And could it be reconciled unto it self yet it stands in full opposition to Scripture Christ stands at the door and knocks Re● 3. 20. He waites till his locks are wet with the dew of the night as Cant. 5. 2. But he makes no forcible entry we read of Gods power in changing the will that it freely accepts but not forcing gifts of grace upon any against their wills Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power Psal 110. 3. He works a will Philip. 2. 13. Christ dwells in none that rise in hostility against him and the positio● which the distinction is brought to assert That unbelief is no bar hindring one from having Christ is no better If unbeliefe be no barre to our receiving of Christ then it is no barre to salvation where the Saviour enters he brings salvation He that hath the Son hath life 1 John 5. 12. But we finde it evidently a barre to salvation according to Scripture Joh. 3. 36. He that beleeveth not the Sonne shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him He that beleeveth not shall be damned Mark 16. 16. Yea according to the Author himself There is no person under heaven shall be saved saith he till he have beleeved which is a truth according to Scripture They could not enter into the rest of Canaan that did lie in their unbelief Neither can they enter into the rest of heaven Heb. 4. 1. Then Christ dwells not in our hearts by Faith Ephes 3. 17. But also in a state of unbelief Then God is not a justifier of those that beleeve in Jesus as Rom. 3. 26. but equally justifies men without Faith in Jesus Then Christ is not set out a propitiation through Faith in his blood but without any Faith in it Then they that beleeve are not only justified from all things from which they could not be justified by the Law of Moses but they that beleeve not And God gave his Sonne that he that beleeves not on him should have everlasting life This doctrine layes all the honour of Faith in the dust Then Habakkuk might have spared this speech that the just shall live by Faith Habbakuk 2. 4. and Paul might have found another way of life in the flesh than by Faith in the Son of God Secondly Object It is said that the justification of a sinner was with God from eternity It was in his purpose before all time to discharge his Elect and to lay nothing to their charge So then this is as election it selfe unconditional To which I answer Answ That this ovethrows the redemption wrought by Christ and the price paid by his sufferings as well as the necessity of Faith What need Christ to be at all that pains to undergo all those sorrows as to be a man of sorrows to do that which from all eternity was done Then as Paul sayes in another case Christ is dead in vain This some have seene yet rather than leave their opinion have chosen to swallow it down and the absurdity with it and do maintaine that Christ did not purchase procure or work any love from God for man but only published and declared that he was from eternity beloved A fit conclusion drawn from such premisses Then Christ was no Authour of eternal salvation as Heb. 5 9. but only the publisher He was a messenger from God in the dayes of his flesh but no Saviour of man He did not redeeme us with a price but only made known that we were so farre in the love of God from eternity that no redemption needs Secondly I say Gods purpose of a thing doth no put it in being He takes his own way to bring about in time that which he purposed before all time All that is done even every work under the Sunne was alike from eternity in the purpose of God Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world Acts 15. 18. So the house that was built this day was built from eternity The childe that was born this day was borne from eternity We may as well say that the Elect were glorified from eternity so that they need to look after no other glorification as to say they are justified from eternity All the works of God were in his purpose from ever who sees all things at once and not as we can comprehend them in their respective succession But we enquire after things as they are in themselves and not as they are in Gods purpose Thirdly Object Some say justification can be no other than an act of God from eternity being an immanent act and not a transient Transient acts are in time done in the juncture of time when God pleases to do them but immanent acts of God are from eternity Answ To which I first answer that it is not without danger for us to bring the actions of God under our examination and then to fix School-notions upon them according to which they must be bounded When as Master Burges well observes we are here in meere darknesse and not able to comprehend how God is said to act or work Treatise of Justification page 166. How much more safe were it for us to learne à posteriore from the mouth of God in Scriptures what his actions are and the order how he works than à pri●re to conclude that they are thus and thus and therefore thus of necessity he must work Yet if we may be so bold as to look into this act of his and take it into consideration according to this notion we may farre rather conclude that justification is an action transient not immanent An immanent action as the Schooles tell us is terminated within the subject and works no real nor evident