Format 
Page no. 
Search this text 
Title:  A treatise of original sin ... proving that it is, by pregnant texts of Scripture vindicated from false glosses / by Anthony Burgess.
Author: Burgess, Anthony, d. 1664.
Table of contents | Add to bookbag
Christ, which if any deny, as the Pelagians did, we will not believe them with Austin, in that they say, but attribute it to their arrogancy and hypocri∣sie, pretending more holiness to the world then they have, for their self-ad∣vantage, or else to their stupidity and senslesness, not feeling what doth indeed annoy and oppose the Spirit of God; and truly they who have not the Spirit of God abiding in them, How can they discern of such a combate? That moral conflict which Aristotle speaketh of in the incontinent person, he may perceive within himself, but this of the Spirit and the flesh, He cannot know, because it is spiritually discerned.SECT. II.Several Propositions clearing the truth about the Combat between the Flesh and Spirit in a godly man.¶. 1.The Difference between Original and Actual Sinne.THe only way to comprehend the latitude of this excellent truth about the Conflict between flesh and spirit in the true believer, because of origi∣nal sinne still adhering to him, is to lay down several Propositions, wherein we may at the same time assert truth, and obviate some error.First, Original sinne doth greatly differ from actual sinne in this particular, that when an actual sinne is committed, there remaineth no more but the guilt of it, which upon repentance by justification is wholly removed away, and thus an actual sinne is as if it had never been; but in original sinne, although the guilt of it be taken away, yet the nature of it abideth still, though not with such dominion as for∣merly it did. It is true the Schoolmen, except Biel and some others, say, actu∣al sinnes leave a macula, a blot or defilement upon the soul, as well as a reatus, or guilt; and what this macula is, they are different in their explication of: but we must necessarily grant, that every actual sinne doth defile the soul, de∣priving it either of the beauty it hath, or ought to have, but yet still the act of sin is passed away, whereas in original sin, the sin it self doth still continue, by which it is, that though to those who are in Christ, there is no actual condemnati∣on, yet there is that which is damnable in them; insomuch as without Christ there is a wo to their most holy and praise-worthy actions. It is true, the Papists and o∣thers look upon this as non-sense, or a contradiction, that sin should be in a man, and not make him guilty; as if actual condemnation might not be separated from sinne, though indeed the desert of condemnation cannot. It cannot be but wheresoever sinne is it doth deserve hell, it hath enough in it to provoke God to wrath, but yet when humbled for and withstood, then through the bloud of Christ, this actual guilt, though not the potential one, is taken away. Yea original sinne doth not only differ from actual sinne, but also habitual, be∣cause though habitual sinnes do abide in a man, yet when a man is regenerated, and made a new creature, all the habits of sinne are expelled; for if the habits of sinne and grace should abide together, then a man might at the same time be holy and unholy, the sonne of God, and the sonne of the Devil, seeing our denomination is from the habits that are within us; therefore that cannot be. But though in our Regeneration the habits of sinne are removed, yet it is not so with original corruption, that is not an acquired, but an innate habit of 0