Selected quad for the lemma: love_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
love_n	believe_v	faith_n	work_n	6,340	5	6.3714	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A50867	An account of Mr. Lock's religion, out of his own writings, and in his own words together with some observations upon it, and a twofold appendix : I. a specimen of Mr. Lock's way of answering authors ..., II. a brief enquiry whether Socinianism be justly charged upon Mr. Lock.	Milner, John, 1628-1702.; Locke, John, 1632-1704. Selections. 1700.	1700 (1700)	Wing M2075; ESTC R548	126,235	194

v. 4. But to wave this Whereas Mr. Lock so often saith that by examining what the Apostles preach'd all through their History he had found that the Word preach'd by them was nothing but this that Jesus was the Messiah I have just now shew'd that it is easie for any one to find the contrary by examining only that part of the History of the Apostles which we have Acts 10. from v. 34. to v. 44. and Acts 13. from v. 23. to v. 42. where by Mr. Lock 's own Confession they treated of the Miracles Death Resurrection and Dominion of our Saviour and of his coming to judge the World as also of Remission of Sins by him See him in Reasonab of Christian p. 41. and Second Vindication p. 307. In his Reasonab of Christian. p. 194. Mr. Lock says Above threescore Years after our Saviour's Passion St. John knew nothing else required to be believ'd for the attaining of Life but that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God But will he hold to this that St. John knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd and admit of no Limitation or Exception Did he not know that it was necessary to believe One Only True God St. John 17. 3. Did he not know that it was necessary to believe that God rais'd the Lord Jesus from the dead But what shall we say to the Words of St. John 20. 31. which Mr. Lock alledges Ibid. p. 193. and from which he inferrs this These are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God and that believing ye may have Life in his Name I answer That it may be said 1. That here it is as much required that we believe Jesus to be the Son of God as 't is to believe him to be the Messiah 2. That these that Jesus is the Messiah and that he is the Son of God are two principal Articles and therefore mention'd by St. John but he does not say These are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and only this neither does he say And that believing this alone ye may have Life But And that believing in general i. e. believing all that the Holy Ghost makes necessary to be believ'd If thou believe in thine Heart that God rais'd the Lord Jesus from the dead thou shalt be saved Rom. 10. 9. Because in these Words our Lord's Resurrection is solely insisted on Mr. Lock will not conclude that St. Paul knew nothing else requir'd to be believed for attaining Life but that And then why should he conclude concerning St. John that he knew nothing else requir'd to be believ'd but these two Articles that Jesus is the Messiah and that he is the Son of God because St. John 20. 31. he mentions only these I know that Mr. Lock does not allow us to call them two Articles but I am so little moved with his saying and not proving that Messiah and the Son of God are two Expressions signifying one and the same thing that I make bold to do it without his License Mr. Lock perhaps will think that I neglect him if I do not take notice of his Chronology He says That above threescore Years after our Saviour's Passion St. John knew nothing else required to be believ'd His Reason is Because St. John's Gospel was written so long after as says he both Epiphanius and St. Jerom assure us I shall grant that St. John's Gospel might perhaps be writ so long after our Lord's Crucifixion for St. Hierom in Catalogo and in Lib. 1. con Jovinian says That Ecclesiastical History makes St. John to have liv'd threescore and eight Years after the Lord's Passion But I cannot but take notice of Mr. Lock 's Caution some may call it his Prudence in not referring us to the Places where Epiphanius and St. Hierom assure us that it was writ so late As to Epiphanius it is true that in Haeres 51. he says that St. John writ his Gospel after the ninetieth Year of his Age and if he had also told us how old St. John was at the time when our Saviour was crucified we might have known whether according to Epiphanius St. John writ his Gospel above threescore Years after our Lord's Passion but I do not remember that Epiphanius hath any where told us St. John's Age at the time of our Saviour's Suffering And as to St. Hierom I have not found that he doth acquaint us either in what Year of his own Age or how long after his Lord's Passion it was that St. John writ his Gospel CHAP. XXIII Of Saving Faith and Vnbelief THey that believe Jesus to be the Messiah their King but will not obey his Laws and will not have him to rule over them they are but greater Rebels and God will not justifie them for a Faith which doth but increase their Guilt and oppose diametrically the Kingdom and Design of the Messiah who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all Iniquity and purifie to himself a peculiar People zealous of good Works Tit. 2. 14. And therefore St. Paul tells the Galatians That that which availeth is Faith but Faith working by Love and that Faith without Works i. e. the Works of sincere Obedience to the Law and Will of Christ is not sufficient for our Justification St. James shews at large Chap. 2. Only those who believe Jesus to be the Messiah and take him to be their King with a sincere Endeavour after Righteousness in obeying his Law shall have their past Sins not imputed to them and shall have that Faith taken instead of Obedience Mr. Lock 's Reasonab of Christian. p. 213 214 215. None are sentenced or punish'd for Unbelief but only for their Misdeeds They are Workers of Iniquity on whom the Sentence is pronounced Every where the Sentence follows doing or not doing without any mention of believing or not believing Not that any to whom the Gospel hath been preach'd shall be sav'd without believing Jesus to be the Messiah for all being Sinners and Transgressors of the Law and so unjust are all liable to Condemnation unless they believe and so through Grace are justified by God for this Faith which shall be accounted to them for Righteousness But the rest wanting this Cover this Allowance for their Transgressions must answer for all their Actions and being found Transgressors of the Law shall by the Letter and Sanction of the Law be condemned for not having paid a full Obedience to that Law and not for want of Faith That is not the Guilt on which the Punishment is laid tho' it be the want of Faith which lays open their Guilt uncover'd and exposes them to the Sentence of the Law against all that are unrighteous Ibid. p. 243 245 246. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Of the Expression Justified for Faith whereas the Scripture-Language is Justified by Faith I took notice before Chap. 19. and 21. Here I cannot but observe how apt Men are

to run into Extremes There are some that say that Unbelief is the only Sin for which Men shall be condemn'd they shall be condemn'd not for their other Sins but solely for this Mr. Lock on the other hand would persuade us that Men shall not be condemned at all for Unbelief The Sentence says he follows not doing without any mention of not believing He alledges for this St. John 5. 28 29. St. Matth. 7. 22 23. 13. 14 49. 16. 24. 25. 24 c. St. Luke 13. 26. But 1. In many of these Places as St. John 5. 28 29. St. Matth. 13. 41. not 14 as it is in Mr. Lock and 49. St. Matth. 16. 27. not 24. as Mr. Lock there is not the least mention of any Sentence therefore it is manifest that they do not tell us for what Men shall be sentenced 2. Those who are mention'd St. Matth. 7. 22 23. and St. Luke 13. 26 27. were Believers and so could not be sentenc'd for Unbelief I do not say that they believ'd to the saving of their Souls or with a saving Faith a Faith working by Love and bringing forth the Fruits of good Works for the contrary is most manifest they were Workers of Iniquity or Unrighteousness But I say that they were Believers they should say unto Christ Lord Lord yea they were such Believers as not only own'd him for their Lord but also prophesied cast out Devils and did many mighty Works in his Name and therefore if they were not sentenced for Unbelief but only for their Misdeeds it cannot be thought strange 3. Let it be suppos'd that they were Unbelievers all that these Texts say is that Workers of Iniquity shall hear that Sentence I tell you I know you not depart from me And if it may be hence inferr'd that they are to be condemn'd only for working Iniquity then from St. Mark 16. 16. where it is said He that believes not shall be damn'd it may be concluded that he shall be condemn'd only for Unbelief that the Sentence shall follow not believing without any mention of not doing But this Inference Mr. Lock will not allow They are Workers of Iniquity on whom the Sentence is pronounced says Mr. Lock out of St. Matth. 7. 23. They are Unbelievers who shall be condemned say I out of St. Mark 16. 16. And if from St. Mark 16. Mr. Lock will not conclude that Men shall be condemn'd only for Unbelief and not for working Iniquity why does he conclude from St. Matth. 7. that they shall be condemn'd only for working Iniquity and not for Unbelief 4. As to St. Matth. 25. 24 c. which may seem to be more to Mr. Lock 's Purpose than the former for this tells us expresly for what Men shall be sentenced to Punishment which the other do not the Judge shall say to those on his Left Hand Depart from me ye cursed for I was hungry and ye gave me not to eat c. it is enough to say That if because the Sentence of extreme Malediction shall be pronounced upon Men because they did not feed the hungry give drink to the thirsty take in the Strangers cloath the naked visit the sick and imprison'd he can inferr that Men shall be condemn'd only for their not having done these things and not for their Unbelief then certainly because St. John 3. 18. it is said He that believeth not is now condemned because he hath not believ'd in the Name of the only begotten Son of God we may inferr that Men are and shall be condemn'd only for their not believing and not for their not doing If Men shall be condemn'd only for the Sins mention'd St. Matth. 25. then they must be condemn'd only for Sins of Uncharitableness Impenitence is not expresly mention'd in these Places of Scripture produced by Mr. Lock any more than Unbelief Will he say that Men shall not be condemn'd for their Impenitence The Truth is that he may with as much Reason say That as say that the Sentence shall not be pronounced on them for their Infidelity Why should Mr. Lock think it strange that Men should be condemn'd for not paying Obedience to the Command of Christ who hath commanded all Men every where to believe and repent Unbelief is a Sin which is the Cause of all our other Sins which would be prevented if we did unfeignedly and with a lively Faith believe the Gospel It is also that which as it were binds and fastens the Guilt of our other Sins upon us they will not be forgiven unless we believe and repent And yet according to Mr. Lock Men shall be condemn'd for their other Sins and not for this I have perhaps dwelt too long upon this yet I think it not amiss to give a brief Account why I render St. John 3. 18. He that believeth not is now condemn'd whereas in our Translation it is He that believeth not is condemn'd already The Words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is now condemned or is now judged as most worthy of Condemnation Now that God hath express'd such wonderful Love to the World by sending his only begotten Son into it not to condemn it but that by him the World might be saved see v. 16 17. and now that he is come into the World and hath wrought such Miracles he that believes not must be most justly worthy of Condemnation because he believes not in the Name of the only begotten Son of God being given that every one that believes in him should not perish but have everlasting Life Now that Light is come into the World if Men will not believe in the Light every one will judge that they are justly worthy of Condemnation as our Saviour says in the very next Words v. 19. This is the Condemnation i. e. that which chiefly deserves Condemnation that Light hath come into the World and Men have loved Darkness more than the Light If this Rendring and Exposition of the Words be receiv'd Commentators will not need to trouble themselves so much as they have done with enquiring in what Sense the Unbeliever is said to be already condemn'd since this which I offer is a plain and easie Interpretation He that believes not is now condemn'd now after the Son of God's being actually come into the World after Miracles wrought and the Gospel preach'd by him because he believes not in the Name of the only begotten Son of God This Text then plainly shews the Danger and Desert of not believing and therefore it concerns us to beware lest as the Israelites of whom the Apostle speaks Heb. 4. did not enter into the promised Land by reason of Unbelief v. 6. so we be excluded the Heavenly Canaan for our Unbelief v. 11 CHAP. XXIV Of Repentance Baptism and Remission of Sins REpentance is as absolute a Condition of the Covenant of Grace as Faith and as necessary to be perform'd as that This was not only the Beginning of our Saviour's preaching but the Summ of all

Reason and so cannot be opposite to it He that believes without having any Reason for believing may be in love with his own Fancies and seeks not Truth as he ought Ibid. c. 17. § 24. Where I want evidence of things there yet is ground enough for me to believe because God hath said it The First Letter p. 227. S. Paul in his Epistles often puts Faith for the whole Duty of a Christian. Reasonab of Christian. p. 199. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS When Mr. Lock says that the Matter or Object of Faith is only Divine Revelation and nothing else if by Divine Revelation be meant the whole Scripture the Historical part of it together with the rest for all Scripture is given by the Inspiration of God 2 Tim. 3. 16. writ by Men inspired and guided by his infallible Spirit it is very true And as to that which he infers that then it cannot be said that it is matter of Faith and not of Reason to believe that such or such a Proposition to be sound in such or such a Book is of Divine Inspiration unless it be reveal'd that that Proposition or all in that Book was communicated by Divine Inspiration we need not contend much with him about it since in the place just now alledg'd viz. 2 Tim. 3. 16. we have a Divine Testimony or Revelation that all the Books of Scripture which were writ and receiv'd before the writing of the Second Epistle to Timothy which as is concluded by all was writ very late are divinely inspir'd Mr. Lock sometimes saith that Faith hath as much Certainly as our Knowledge it self and that it leaves no manner of Doubt or Hesitation yet other where he declaims against the Certainty of Faith Now I would know how he can reconcile himself to himself in this He says that to talk of the Certainty of Faith seems all one as to talk of the Knowledge of Believing that Certainty destroys Faith when it is brought to Certainty Faith is destroyed 't is Knowledge then and Faith no longer For to him to know and be certain is the same thing see his Second Letter p. 93. and Certainty the same thing with Knowledge see his Third Letter p. 122. Now if this be so if Certainty and Knowledge are the same thing then as he says that to talk of the Certainty of Faith seems all one as to talk of the Knowledge of Believing so he might have said that to talk of the Certainty of Knowledge seems all one as to talk of the Knowledge of Knowing and that to talk of certain Knowledge seems all one as to talk of known Knowing a way of speaking not easy to be understood Yea as often as Mr. Lock useth these Expressions Certainty of Knowledge and Certain Knowledge so oft he confutes this Fancy of his that Knowledge and Certainty are the same thing As when we say a certain Persuasion or a certain Truth these Expressions imply that there may be a Persuasion or a Truth not so certain so when we say Certain Knowledge it seems to imply that there may be a Knowledge not so certain And so when Mr. Lock says We certainly know and We have a more certain Knowledge Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 6. doth he not plainly imply that there is a Knowledge less certain So that it is clear from his own Expreshons that Knowledge and Certainty are not the same thing But that which I chiefly desire to know is How Mr. Lock will reconcile his denying Certainty to Faith with his saying that Faith hath as much Certainty as our Knowledge it self Whereas Mr. Lock says that he finds his Bible speaks of the Assurance of Faith but no where that he can remember of the Certainty of Faith I desire that he would please to let us know the difference between Assurance and Certainty or between Full Assurance and Certainty As to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 10. 22. which is translated Full Assurance I suppose the Translators if they had pleased might have rendred it Full Certainty or Full Persuasion or Certain Persuasion as Erasmus and others render it by Certitudo As Mr. Lock craves leave to use the Words of Mr. Chillingworth so he ought to crave his Reader 's Pardon for not transcribing his Words so largely as he ought to have done For though it sufficiently appears from so much as he hath cited from him that Mr. Chillingworth makes against and not for him yet it would have been more apparent if he had alledg'd him more fully Mr. Chillingworth as Mr. Lock cites him says that there is not requir'd of us a Knowledge of the Articles of Faith and an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science In which Words if by an Adherence to them be meant an Assent to or Belief of them Certainty is plainly ascrib'd to Belief or Faith which Mr. Lock will not allow though not a Certainty equal to that of Sense or Science But let us take a view of Mr. Chillingworth's Words at large I do says he heartily acknowledge and believe the Articles of our Faith to be in themselves Truths as certain and insallible as the very common Principles of Geometry and Metaphysicks But that there is requir'd of us a Knowledge of them or an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science that such a Certainty is requir'd of us under pain of Damnation so that no Man can hope to be in the state of Salvation but he that finds in himself such a degree of Faith such a strength of Adherence this I have already demonstrated to be a great Errour and of dangerous and pernicious Consequence Thus Mr. Chillingworth c. 6. § 3. We see now what it is that this great Man saith viz. That a Certainty equal to that of Sense or Science is not requir'd of all Men under pain of Damnation so that no Man can be in a state of Salvation that hath it not But God may grant that degree of Certainty to some which he doth not require under pain of Damnation of all Mr. Lock farther tells us that there is not required of us a Knowledge of the Articles of our Faith and an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science and that for this reason among others viz. that Faith is not Knowledge no more than Three is Four but eminently contain'd in it so that he that knows believes and something more but he that believes many times does not know nay if he doth barely and merely believe he doth never know These are Mr. Chillingworth's own words Thus Mr. Lock And I grant that the words Faith is not Knowledge c. are Mr. Chillingworth's but these And that for this reason among others are not his but Mr. Lock 's own Mr. Chillingworth would never have offer'd such a Reason to prove that there is not requir'd of us a Knowledge of the Articles of our Faith and an Adherence to them as

God but nothing of this is in the Text. Besides the Word that is here translated Right is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which as is well known signifies License or Power as well as Right and not only by the Vulgar but also by the Syriack Arabick and AEthiopick it is rendred Power And this Signification agrees exactly with the Text Blessed are they that do his Commandments that they may have Power or Licence to eat of the tree of Life In this place therefore there is nothing concerning any Claim of Right and consequently it is not at all to the purpose I might have added that Mr. Lock speaks of exact Obedience to the Law and perhaps he would not find it an easie matter to prove that by Doing his Commandments here is meant such exact unsinning Obedience But tho' Rev. 22. 14. will not prove his Claim of Right yet if he use those words in a larger sense as they may denote a Right by Promise I do not deny that his former Text viz. Rom. 4. 4. may prove it To him that worketh the reward which God is suppos'd to have promised in the Covenant of Works is reckon'd as debt he may lay claim to it as his Right by virtue of that Promise But if he take them in the strict sense as if exact Obedience had properly merited the Reward and might have claim'd it of Right tho' no such Promise or Covenant had interven'd he will hardly prove that from Rom. 4. Yea our Saviour seems to have determin'd very plainly against such a Claim S. Luke 17. 10. When ye shall have done all things which are commanded you say We are unprofitable servants we have done that which was our duty to do CHAP. XX. Of Faith in general FAith is nothing else but an Assent founded upon the highest Reason Mr. Lock Essay l. 4. c. 16. § 14. The Matter of Faith being only Divine Revelation and nothing else Faith as we use the Word call'd commonly Divine Faith has to do with no Propositions but those which are suppos'd to be divinely revealed So that I do not see how those who make Revelation alone the sole Object of Faith can say that it is a matter of Faith and not of Reason to believe that such or such a Proposition to be found in such or such a Book is of divine Inspiration unless it be reveal'd that that Proposition or all in that Book was communicated by divine Inspiration Without such a Revelation the believing or not believing that Proposition or Book to be of divine Authority can never be matter of Faith but matter of Reason and such as I must come to the Assent to only by the use of my Reason Things beyond the discovery of our natural Faculties and above Reason are when revealed the proper matter of Faith Whatever Proposition is reveal'd of whose truth our Mind by its natural Faculties and Notions cannot judge that is purely matter of Faith Where the Principles of Reason have not evidenced a Proposition to be certainly true or false there clear Revelation as another Principle of Truth and ground of Assent may determine and so it may be matter of Faith Ibid. c. 18. § 6 7 9. Faith has as much Certainty as our Knowledge it self Faith is a settled and sure Principle of Assent and Assurance and leaves no manner of room for Doubt or Hesitation Essay l. 4. c. 16. § 14. To talk of the Certainty of Faith seems all one to me as to talk of the Knowledge of Believing a way of speaking not easie to me to understand Bring Faith to Certainty and it ceases to be Faith When it is brought to Certainty Faith is destroy'd 't is Knowledge then and Faith no longer The Second Letter p. 95 96. My Bible Heb. 10. 22. expresses the highest degree of Faith which the Apostle recommended to Believers in his time by Full Assurance I find my Bible speaks of the Assurance of Faith but no where that I can remember of the Certainty of Faith though in many places it speaks of the Certainty of Knowledge and therefore I speak so too and shall not I think be condemned for keeping close to the Expressions of our Bible The Third Letter p. 122 123. I say with Mr. Chillingworth c. 6. § 3. that I do heartily acknowledge and believe the Articles of our Faith to be in themselves Truths as certain and infallible as the very common Principles of Geometry and Metaphysicks But that there is not requir'd of us a Knowledge of them and an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science and that for this Reason among others given both by Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Hooker viz. that Faith is not Knowledge no more than three is four but eminently contain'd in it so that he that knows believes and something more but he that believes many times does not know nay if he doth barely and merely believe he doth never know These are Mr. Chillingworth's own Words c. 6. § 2. That this Assurance of Faith may approach very near to Certainty and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the Mind I have so plainly declar'd Essay l. 4. c. 17. § 16. that no body I think can question it There I say of some Propositions wherein Knowledge i. e. in my sense Certainty fails us that their Probability is so clear and strong that Assent as necessarily follows it as Knowledge doth Demonstration Ibid. p. 124. Herein lies the Difference between Probability and Certainty Faith and Knowledge that in all the parts of Knowledge there is Intuition each immediate Idea each Step has its visible and certain Connexion in Belief not so Essay l. 4. c. 15. § 3. To say that Believing and Knowing stand upon the same grounds would be I think to say that Probability and Demonstration are the same thing The Third Letter p. 223. He that says he barely believes acknowledges that he assents to a Proposition as true upon bare Probability Ibid. p. 159. I think it is possible to be certain upon the Testimony of God where I know that it is the Testimony of God because in such a case that Testimony is capable not only to make me believe but if I consider it right to make me know the thing to be so and so I may be certain For the Veracity of God is as capable of making me know a Proposition to be true as any other way of Proof can be and therefore I do not in such a case barely believe but know such a Proposition to be true and attain Certainty Ibid. p. 133. Faith as contradistinguished to Reason is the Assent to any Proposition not made out by the Deductions of Reason but upon the Credit of the Proposer as coming immediately from God Essay l. 4. c. 18. § 2. Faith is nothing but a firm Assent of the Mind which if it be regulated as is our duty cannot be afforded to any thing but upon good