A30248:154
The true doctrine of justification asserted and vindicated, from the errors of Papists, Arminians,…The true doctrine of justification asserted and vindicated, from the errours of Papists, Arminians,…
The true doctrine of justification asserted and vindicated, from the errors of Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially Antinomians in XXX lectures preached at Lawrence-Jury, London / by Anthony Burgess ...The true doctrine of justification asserted and vindicated, from the errours of Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and more especially Antinomians in XXX lectures preached at Lawrence-Iury, London / by Anthony Burgess ...
London: printed by A. Miller for Tho. Underhill, 1651
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
2. They both agree in the places of Scripture, as Christ cleansing §2us from all sin, Thou art all fair my love, To purchase to himself a Church without spot or wrinkle; These and the like, they both insist much upon.
3. They both agree in reason to prove it, viz. That sin is so odious §3to God that he hateth it wheresoever it is, and therefore a godly man must at the same time be the object of Gods hatred and love, which (say they) is absurd to affirm; but here they differ; the Antinomian makes a believer without sin, because of Christs righteousness which he is clothed with;1 The Papist he makes him to be without sin inherently, because of the grace of sanctification perfectly renewing him. And indeed though the Antinomian seem to show more zeal to Christ and grace, yet the Papist speaks more to reason; and if those places of Scripture did prove an utter extinguishing of sin, it would carry it fairer, for an inherent perfect holiness, 2then such a mystical perfection as they imagine. In the third place, I shall lay down the truth, and wherein Scripture-doctrine doth indeed sail between these two rocks.
3. They both agree in reason to prove it, viz. That sin is so odious §3to God that he hateth it wheresoever it is, and therefore a godly man must at the same time be the object of Gods hatred and love, which (say they) is absurd to affirm; but here they differ; the Antinomian makes a believer without sin, because of Christs righteousnesse which he is cloathed with;1 The Papist he makes him to be without sin inherently, because of the grace of sanctification perfectly renewing him. And indeed though the Antinomian seem to shew more zeal to Christ and grace, yet the Papist speaks more to reason; and if those places of Scripture did prove an utter extinguishing of sin, it would carry it fairer, for an inherent perfect holinesse,