A30248:698
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.
Thirdly, This truth may be proved from the necessary qualifications required in those that have Pardon, which cannot be unless a man have already committed the sin, as 1 Joh. 1.9. If we confess our sins, he is faithful to pardon. Now confession is always of a thing already extant. How absurd would it be, for a man to go and confess the sins he will commit? This would rather be impudence then humiliation; look over all the confessions made by ⟨p. 249⟩the people of God for themselves, or in the behalf of others, as Davids, Ezra's, Nehemiahs, Daniels, and you shall observe them all limited to sins that have been done, never extended to what they shall commit. Thus in the old Testament, when any had sinned, they offered sacrifices. There was no sacrifice appointed for a future sin, but only for that which was already committed. Thus to pardon is required forsaking of a mans sin, Prov. 28.13. Now how can a man be said to forsake that which is not, to leave that which is future? especially, as you have heard, repentance is commanded as the way wherein only pardon may be had, now how can repentance be about that which is to come? Can a man repent of any thing but what is past? The two Greek words [Greek or Hebrew], to be wise and understand after the fact is done, and [Greek or Hebrew], reditus, a turning again to those whom we have offended, make it as clear as the Sun, that there is no pardon of sin before committed.
Thirdly, This truth may be proved from the necessary qualifications required in those that have Pardon, which cannot be unless a man have already committed the sin, as 1 Joh. 1.9. If we confesse our sins, he is faithful to pardon. Now confession is alwayes of a thing already extant. How absurd would it be, for a man to go and confess the sins he will commit? This would rather be impudence then humiliation; look over all the confessions made by ⟨p. 249⟩the people of God for themselves, or in the behalf of others, as Davids, Ezrahs, Nehemiahs, Daniels, and you shall observe them all limited to sins that have been done, never extended to what they shall commit. Thus in the old Testament, when any had sinned, they offered sacrifices. There was no sacrifice appointed for a future sin, but only for that which was already committed. Thus to pardon is required forsaking of a mans sin,