Selected quad for the lemma: tradition_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
tradition_n	faith_n	scripture_n	write_v	3,423	5	6.0492	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26923	An end of doctrinal controversies which have lately troubled the churches by reconciling explication without much disputing. Written by Richard Baxter.	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1691 (1691)	Wing B1258AA; ESTC R2853	205,028	388

mistaken ones so seduce that one Error in the Order leads to many § 28. Yet even Catechumens and young Christians should learn what they learn in method And that is first the said Baptismal Covenant and our Relation to the Trinity thereby and all that is added to their Knowledge daily be it never so little should be methodically added For a weak head may perceive the true method of the few Essentials being great and plain though the strongest cannot follow the due Distribution of innumerable Integrals and Consequent Truths As the first partitions of the Tree into its greater Boughs are easily perceived though not the innumerable sprigs thence arising § 29. Accordingly a wise Teacher will proceed with Infidels in proving the Christian Religion yea and with himself and will first prove the Truth of the Essentials which are delivered us both in Scripture and other infallible Tradition before he undertake to prove all the Scriptures to be the Word of God For he that will begin here 1. Must shew the Book which he will so prove and when he cannot vindicate it from variety of Lections and the Errors of Scribes and Printers to say nothing of the greater of Translators it will stop him in his Designs 2. And when he hath so many thousand Words to prove to be Divine and so many Integrals and Accidentals to make good he maketh his Work difficult by allowing his Scholar to doubt as much of the Essentials of Religion as he shall doubt of the Truth of any particular Book or Text History Genealogy c. in the whole Scripture A blind Zeal for Scripture hath led some to this dangerous way but the ancient Churches did otherwise and so will all that well understand what they do And really on supposition it could be proved as it cannot that any Penman of the Scripture erred in a Ci●ation a Genealogy the Circumstance of a bye-History c. it would not follow that we must be therefore uncertain of all our Religion even the Essentials and they ignorantly betray their Faith that say It would so follow § 30. So far is it from being true that the Scripture is too narrow as to the matter of Divine Faith and Duty without the additional matter of Tradition that indeed as the compleat Body of a Man hath more than his Essentials yea or Inte●rals even Hair and Nails as Accidents so hath the Holy Scripture as to the matter of Divine Faith and Duty There is more than is absolutely necessary to Salvation but not less § 31. They that in peevish opposition to others tell us That Christ made no Law and that the Gospel is not a Law if they strive not about equivocal Words but mean that Christ is not a Legislator nor hath a Law and Covenant by which he will govern and judge the World do deny all our Christianity at once For Christ is not Christ if he be not the King of the Church nor is he King if he be not a Lawgiver nor doth he Rule and Iudge if he have no Law which is so far from Truth that there is now no Law of God that we are under but what is truly the Law of Christ For he is Lord of all and Head over all things to his Church and all power in Heaven and Earth is given to him and the Father alone or meerly as Creator by the Law of Innocency judgeth no man but hath committed all Iudgment to the Son as Redeemer and Universal Administrator The lapsed World and the Law which they are under as rational Creatures are now delivered up to the Redeemer whose Law as is aforesaid hath two parts 1. The Law of lapsed Nature commonly called the Moral Law 2. The Remedying Law of Faith of which before § 32. But it is not to be supposed that the very preceptive part of the Law of Innocency is now in force to us as it was to Adam For it bound him to be perfectly innocent in Act and Dispositions But to a Man that hath lost his Innocency and is already in Act and Habit sinful it is not to be supposed that the Law saith Thou shalt be innocent For that were to command not only a Moral but a Physical absolute impossibility as saying Thou shalt not have sinned § 33. Obj. God changeth not his Law when man changeth his capacity Therefore the Law may be the same as in Innocency both as to the Precept Threatning and Promise God may still say 1. Sin not or be innocent 2. And if thou be perfect thou shalt live 3. Else thou shalt die And if man will make himself uncapable it 's his own change § 34. Answ. I spake to this before and now further add God's Law is not to be taken for a meer script of Words considered as standing in a Book not obliterated or as written on stone and not broken or cast away The signum materially may stand and the Law be changed and the signification cease As a repealed Statute may be still in the Books and Records God's Law is signum voluntatis divinae debitum constituentis Therefore if it signifie not God's Will as constituting what shall be due from us and to us it is no Law And that it may so signifie his Will and constitute Dueness Debitum or Ius or as they use to say oblige and give the Subject must be in a natural capacity For where there is no Subject to be obliged there is no Law And where natural capacity ceaseth as in a dead corps there is no Subject to be governed And the Law is Instrumentum regiminis So that if you do not only say This was God's Law but This is God's Law you must mean Thus he n●w obligeth man and This he threatneth now and This he conditionally giveth him So that if it be an unchanged Law to us just as it was in Innocency you must make this the sence of precept threat and promise 1. Preserve thine Innocency and sin not in act or habit but be thou a pe●fect Obeyer of my Laws and this to one that hath sinned already and is habitually inclined to more q. d. Let not that be which is or quod factum est infectum fiat 2. If thou sin thou shalt be an Heir of Death When we are Sinners and Heirs of Death already 3. If thou be and continue sinless and perfect thou shalt not die but live When we are Sinners and dead before In which Case all Law and Reason saith That the Law doth transire in sententiam vel rem judicatam § 35. So that as was before-said the Covenant of Works is ceased yea the Law or Precept bindeth not now as it is a Law of Innocency made to innocent Nature for its preservation for Nature is not innocent But the Law of Nature is now the Law of lapsed redeemed Nature and not of innocent Nature And it obligeth us for the future to as much perfection of Duty as we are naturally

he sinned if he performed not one Act of Love and Obedience to his Maker This Fancy I dismiss § 17. Others say That if he had overcome one Temptation he should have been confirmed but I find no Promise or Proof of it in Nature nor in Scripture and I suppose they feign not a secret conditional Will of God § 18. Though it be agreed on by most Protestants That Adam had been an Heir of Death and Hell if he committed the least Sin even an idle thought or word though he had not eaten the forbidden Fruit and so that the Law of Nature made Hell the due punishment of the least Sin and doth so still if it be not pardoned yet the Law of Nature in our lapsed state is herein somewhat dark and the Scripture not so clear for it as some imagine But thus much methinks Nature it self still speaketh § 19. 1. That the least sin deserveth some degree of Punishment 2. That God hath various degrees of Punishment suited to the degrees of Sin 3. That the least Sin hath a tendency to more and that still to more till Man be utterly miserable And that both in its own Nature and in the forfeiture of some measure of God's Grace or Help 4. That if you suppose that vain thought or word to consist still with true Love to God God could not immediately hate and damn that Soul that so loved him But if that Person perish it must be by that idle thought or word producing worse till it had turned his love from God to the Creature 5. That antecedently to Gods undertaking to be the Ruler of Man no doubt but as an absolute Owner he might have taken away all that he gave him even his Life and Being without any fault in Man for he may do as he list with his own And therefore he might have done the same for the smallest fault which he might have done without it And therefore he might have inflicted any Pain which to Man is not worse than Annihilation for ever But whether his three forementioned Acts 1. Antecedently placing Man as he did 2. Making him such Duty as he made him 3. And such Inclination to better do not imply that God would not punish him unless he sinned and then but according to the degree of his Sin I leave to Consideration § 20. But whether God must and whether he might punish the least Sin with Hell are different questions Whether by the Law of Nature he must do it or be unjust and so a vain thought was not pardonable by or under that Law and so Adam was an Heir of Hell when his thought first failed before he did eat or consent to eat the forbidden Fruit are questions which I cannot resolve from Nature and are to me more difficult in Scripture than to wiser men § 21. The supernatural part of the Law is known to us only by Scripture but perhaps the Fathers before the Flood might know more of it by Tradition than God hath thought meet to write for our times § 22. The preceptive part was the not eating the forbidden Fruit and consequently the overcoming all Temptations thereto The Law of Matrimony and the Sabbath also are partly supernatural called Positive § 23. The Penalty is called Death which signifieth Undoing and Misery But whether it was only temporal Death or also Hell Divines are not agreed They that are for the former seem chiefly drawn to it by comparing the Law with the Iudgment and Execution thinking it indecent to say that God fulfilled not his Threatning but dispensed with it And therefore seeing Temporal Death only is in the Sentence and Execution they think that no more was meant And consequently that Christ did not by Redemption prevent the sentence and execution of that Death but only when it was fulfilled deliver us from continuance under it by a Resurrection § 24. But I would have such remember 1. That the Soul was made naturally immortal that is not tending to Annihilation unless God should against Nature or settled Course annihilate it And if it were not annihilated it must be in some state good or bad If it was to be penally annihilated Christ prevented that And such an annihilation is as little desirable as a tolerable degree of Pain 2. And that God's Law determining directly but de debito poenae what should be Man's due and not absolutely and peremptorily then de eventu God reserved to himself a pardoning Power so it were done upon valuable Considerations more fully glorifying him and his Government and Law than Man's Destraction would have done And thus to dispense with his Law is no dishonour to God § 25. It is the Wrath to come that Christ delivereth us from and Hell and the Power of Satan that he redeemed us from Therefore it seemeth that it was no less that our Sin deserved And spiritual death is contained in Sin and Apostacy it self § 26. What the Reward was to be besides what I said before from Nature it is not easie to gather out of Scripture nor to find there any plainer a Promise of Life but in both I think it is certainly implied § 27. It is ordinary to say That the Condition of Adam's Confirmation was That he should have eaten first of the Tree of Life But to find that among the Commands much less the Condition with a Promise of Confirmation requireth more discerning than I have notwithstanding the words Lest he eat and live c. from which they gather it § 28. How far this Law is yet in force is also difficultly disputed In brief 1. The general Command of perfect Love and Obedience for the future and the Commands of the unalterable Duties of Nature are still so far in force as to oblige us 2. But whether sub poena mortis is the doubt Punishment is due either absolutely and statedly and so it maketh it due only to the Impenitent and Unbelievers Or only in primo instanti inceptively with an annexed Remedy And so every Sin maketh Punishment so far due to the Faithful as that they have need of the Grace of Christ and the new Covenant to pardon it 3. But the premiant part of the Law of Innocency from whence it is named a Covenant is now truly null Which maketh our Divines say That the Law of Nature which they call moral bindeth as a Rule of Duty but the Covenant ceaseth § 29. This was not done by GOD but Man who ceased to be a capable Subject of that Covenant Promise or Reward And so the Condition Innocency or perfect Obedience being become naturally impossible we must not feign God to say to Sinners On condition you be no Sinners you shall live But Cessante capacitate subditi cessat promissio conditionalis transit in sententiam But of the Cessation of the Law and Covenant of Innocency see more after Sect. 5 § 32 c. § 30. They pervert this Covenant by their unproved Fictions who