A30248:438
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.
But you may say,1 Why should not repentance be as great a good, and as much honour God, as sin is an evil? For when you say, sin hath an infinite evil in it; it is meant only objectivè, because God against whom it is committed, is an infinite God; Now then if sin be called infinite, because it turneth from an infinite God, why should not repentance be said to be ⟨p. 162⟩infinite, because it turneth to an infinite God? This hath much puzzled some, and hath made them hold that repentance hath as much infinite worth in it, because of God, to whom a man is turned by it, as sin hath infinite evil in it. But there is a vast difference, because it is enough for sin to have an infinite evil in it, because the offence is done against an infinite God, and so the nature of an offence is according to the object against whom it is. As an offence against a King or Emperor is more then against a private man; so that still offences are more or less as the persons against whom they are, be of greater or less dignity: but now it is otherwise in good things that are done by way of satisfaction, that ariseth from the subject, not the object: as now repentance, though it be a turning to God, who is infinite, yet that cannot have infinite satisfaction, because the subject which doth repent is finite: Therefore this cleareth the difficulty: offences arise according to the object, but satisfaction increaseth according to the subject. Hence it is, That Christ only could satisfy, because he only was an infinite person. Otherwise if grace or holiness could have done it, Angels might have wrought our redemption. Besides, our repentance And turning to God, cannot be as meritorious of good, as sin is of punishment, because of that true rule, Malum meum & purè malum est, & meum est: bonum meum, neque purè est, neque meum est. Our sins are altogether, and only sins, and they are truly ours: but our good things are neither purely good things, nor yet ours, but the gifts of God.
But you may say,1 Why should not repentance be as great a good, and as much honour God, as sinne is an evil? For when you say, sinne hath an infinite evil in it; it is meant only objectivè, because God against whom it is committed, is an infinite God; Now then if sinne be called infinite, because it turneth from an infinite God, why should not repentance be said to be