Wilson - BS2663 W54 653

260 An Expofition upon Chap,$, and therefore free from condemnation, as he had univerfally taught in the firfi verle of this Chapter. Ti M. What may we learn for our in- Ifrul.tion,from this proceeding and methodof the Apaf`lle? S t L. From hence we learn,the way of cutting and dividing the word of God aright,to be this : namely firfi, to propound do&rive generally Petting it forth byfimilitudes, confirming it by reafons.Secondly,to defcend to particu- lar applying it to the tile ofevery Chri- ftian in the affembly, for teaching, con- futing,reproving,for exhorting,and for comforting : this application is the life and foul of do&rin,and as a whetftone to Pet an edg on it;it is frequent in Scrip- ture. T r M. Nowfbew ut the feverall parti of ibis Text. S t L. The parts be two t first a pro- pofition in thefe words,[Te Romani are not in the flefb,l it is Pet forth by the con- trary ,[But ye are in the Spirit.]Secondly, a confirmation of the things propoun- ded by two proofs or reafons;the one is taken from the efficient caule;co wit,the Spirit of God dwelling in them: the fe- cond, is taken from their communion with Chrift,whofe members they are : and therefore cannot be in the flefh, but in the Spirit. T M. What sloth it fignifie to be in the fefi? St L. It fignifies two things in Scrip - ture;one is to be an infirme and weak man,to have flefh, and body, and foul, as other frail men have, 2 Cor. t o. 3. Secondly, to be carnal! and unregene- rate, as wee are all by nature; to wit, when in all our a &ions we are all ruled and governed by the fen le and affe &ion of our nature, not yet regenerate by Chrift;thus it muff be taken here. T t st. li there any difference between baing in the flefb, and having fle(h in ut ? S t L. Yea very much : for the moll godly which are molt renewed, yet (till have force flefh and corruption in them, being regenerate in part only;as we have teen out of Rom. 7. in the example of Paul: but to be in the flefh, agre- eth to men wholly unregenerate. Ts m. Whereunto dotb this interpreta- tion ferve us S r L. Firff,to reprove loch as do in- terpret this claufe of Marriage , as the Pope Syritius did, thereby to condemn the marriage of Minifters .Secondly, it doth admonifh us,that it is a danger al- wayes to underftand the Scripture, ac- cording to the proper fignification of the words; for then we muff fay, that there are men living that are without flefh, and bone,blood, and body; be- caufe Paul faith here of the living and beleevingRomanes, that they are not in the fiefh:it is therfore a figurative fpeech to be underftood of the corruption of nature: in Scripture Dianoia and not To rheton only ih uft be oblerved. T t M. What is it to he in the Spirit) Sa L.Firft,that the ele& though they be born in fìn,yet do not alwaies abide in the eftate of corruption, but are tranflated into the efiate ofgrace,being of meer carnal] men, partly fpirituall.' Secondly, though many at once have both flefh and fpirit in them, yet none can be both in the flefh and in the fpi- rit, thefe are filch contraries, as they cannot Rand together.Thirdly, that it is the effentiall property, and moft cer- tain rule of a Chriltian,by allmeansto avoid the affe &ions ofthe flefh, and in all things to be carried by the fpirit. Laftly, we are carried by this example of Paul tojudg charitably of fuch Chri- flians, which profefs Chrifl and do not things contrary unto their profef ion, that they are not carnali but fpirituall. This is the canon and rule of Charity, whichindeedis not fo certain but that it may deceive,becaufe it cannot look to things within , and hypocrites bear a thew of piety without fubftance. There- fore the fpirit of difcerning fpirits, is a great bleflïng,the Apoftle excelled in it. T t M. Come wee now to the reafoni to prove that they are not in thefiefh, but in the fpirit. S t L. The first reafon is this : The Spirit of God dwels in you, therefore ye are not in the flefh to walke after it, but in the fpirit. Trat.

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=