[An apology for the treatise, called A triall of faith. Concerning the precedency of repentance for sinne, before faith in Christ for pardon]

About this Item

Title
[An apology for the treatise, called A triall of faith. Concerning the precedency of repentance for sinne, before faith in Christ for pardon]
Author
Chibald, William, 1575-1641.
Publication
[London :: N. Okes for S. Man,
1624]
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Chibald, William, 1575-1641. -- Tryall of faith -- Early works to 1800.
Justification -- Early works to 1800.
Faith -- Early works to 1800.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A18602.0001.001
Cite this Item
"[An apology for the treatise, called A triall of faith. Concerning the precedency of repentance for sinne, before faith in Christ for pardon]." In the digital collection Early English Books Online 2. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A18602.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed October 31, 2024.

Pages

The Apology.

Vpon this I reioyne in this manner. 1. Ancient Interpreters, botha 1.1 Papists andb 1.2 Protestants, doe expound the words as I doe, that the latter are put exegetical∣ly, for the interpretation of the former.

2 My Aduersaries barely say, the wordes distinguish, and not interpret without any reason of their affirmation, and therefore it is not good.

3 If those wordes, acknowledging of

Page 81

the truth, be a distinction, betweene the former words, viz. the faith of the elect, then do they distinguish two faiths, then do they distinguish the faith of the elect which is a sauing faith, from an acknow∣ledging of the truth, or an assent vnto it, which is an Historicall faith, then by ac∣knowledging the truth must be meant an Historicall faith: but by the acknowledg∣ing the truth in Timothy, cannot be meant an Historicall faith, because an Historicall faith cannot follow repentance in nature, but goe before it, for the acknowledging the truth there spoken (whateuer it bee) doth follow the repentance there spoken of, because it is thereunto as an effect vnto a cause, or as an end to a meanes: for so much they confesse themselues, in their ex∣position of the sence, of that place, which in their Iudgement and words runs thus, that God may giue them repentance, that those which now oppose the truth, may be wonne to the profession of it.

So that either those words the acknow∣ledging of the truth, must not distinguish that which is meant by them from the faith of the elect, and by them must be meant an Historicall faith, and then repen∣tance must goe before an Historicall faith, or a beleefe of the Gospell, or the acknow∣ledging

Page 82

the truth doth interpret, the na∣ture of the faith of the elect there spoken of, and then repentance must go before the faith of the elect, vtrum horum? and so much in defence of the reasons of my ex∣position of the text to Timothy, wherein my second Argument is grounded, now a word onely in answere to their Interpre∣tation of the place.

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.