A57982:371
The trial & triumph of faithThe tryal & triumph of faith
The trial & triumph of faith: or, An exposition of the history of Christs dispossessing of the daughter of the woman of Canaan Delivered in sermons; in which are opened, the victory of faith; the condition of those that are tempted; the excellency of Jesus Christ and free-grace; and some special grounds and principles of libertinism and antinomian errors, discovered by Samuel Rutherfurd, professor of divinity in the University of St. Andrews. Published by authority.The tryal & triumph of faith: or, An exposition of the history of Christs dispossessing of the daughter of the woman of Canaan Delivered in sermons; in which are opened, the victory of faith; the condition of those that are tempted; the excellency of Jesus Christ and free-grace; and some speciall grounds and principles of libertinisme and antinomian errors, discovered by Samuel Rutherfurd, professor of divinity in the University of St. Andrews. Published by authority.
London: printed by John Field, 1652
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.
What doth he mean? He meaneth he hath not done the Fact that was laid to his charge: Then not to do the Fact of sin, to Dr. Crisp, is not to be guilty: Now I assume, But Jesus Christ did never any sinful fact, as he also confesseth, then Christ was punished for sin, and yet was never guilty of sin, this must be the greatest unjustice in the world to punish a man for sin, altogether free of the guilt of sin; except Antinomians distinguish with us, between sinful guilt, and penal guilt, called Reatus culpae, and Reatus poenae, or Reatus personae, seu potentialis, and Reatus formalis, seu actualis, they shall never expede themselves.
What doth he mean? He meaneth he hath not done the Fact that was laid to his charge: Then not to do the Fact of sin, to Dr. Crispe, is not to be guilty: Now I assume, But Jesus Christ did never any sinfull fact, as he also confesseth, then Christ was punished for sin, and yet was never guilty of sin, this must be the greatest unjustice in the world to punish a man for sin, altogether free of the guilt of sin; except Antinomians distinguish with us, between sinfull guilt, and penall guilt, called Reatus culpae, and Reatus poenae, or Reatus personae, seu potentialis, and Reatus formalis, seu actualis, they shall never expede themselves.
Now though it be true, that in Law the Debtor and the Surety be both one Legal person,1 yet intrinsically they are not one, the broken Debtor as such may be an unjust man, and the Surety a faithful and just man; so that the surety, as a satisfying Surety, removeth only the punishment due to the Debtor for his unjustice; but he removeth not formally unjustice, except he be such a Surety as Christ, who can both pay the debt, & so remove the ill of punishment, and also infuse holiness, and sanctify and remove the evil of sin; hence in justification formally, Christ only taketh away the punishment of everlasting fire, and eternal condemnation due to sin; but he removeth not sin it self; sin it self is removed in sanctification, and by degrees; justification taketh the sting out