Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	eternal_a	jesus_n	life_n	9,949	5	4.6444	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A80793	The refuter refuted. Or Doctor Hammond's Ektenesteron defended, against the impertinent cavils of Mr. Henry Jeanes, minister of Gods Word at Chedzoy in Somerset-shire. By William Creed B.D. and rector of East-Codford in Wiltshire.	Creed, William, 1614 or 15-1663.	1659 (1659)	Wing C6875; Thomason E1009_1; ESTC R207939	554,570	699

sed quod potest adjutus divino Spiritu Quo autem major nunc datur aut offertur spiritus copia eo praeceptum quoque istud vberius praestandum est H. Grot. in annot ad Matth c. 22. vers 37. p. 375. § 48. † Daille l. 1. de Jejuniis cap. 7. apud D. Hammond in his Account of the Triplex Diatribe p. 144 Scalig. Elench Trehaeres c. 22. in the treatise of Will worship sect 28. Vide Bp. Downeham of the Covenant of Grace c. 10. throughout Monsieur Daillé and Joseph Scaliger both Protestants sufficient and in Treatises particularly opposed against Bellarmine and Serrarius the Jesuite have been quoted by the Doctor to this very purpose and others might be added to the Number But these are sufficient to acquit the Doctor from the suspicion of Popery in this his Doctrine and let our Refuter know that all Protestants are not even of the learned Chamier's opinion in this point And now that the Doctor and those of his Judgement are in the right I undertake to defend and shall make it good in * Vide infra sect 32. §. 20 21 22 23 24 c. 32. sect 26 27 29 31. due place § 49. Indeed the assertion of Chamier is so notoriously false that it carries its own confutation in its forehead even to the most ordinary observer and I wonder by what misfortune and inadvertence it dropped from his Pen. What Omnes gradns comprehendimus amoris qui obtineri possunt vel in hac vita vel in altera si quid sit minus id peccato deputamus Let our Refuter himself in his most Protestant Ruff construe it and tell us how he can make it good Can he ever be able to prove that it is my sin that I see not God face to face while I am in the body and walk by Faith not by sight If it be my sin that I be not a Comprehensor in Heaven while I am in the state of a Viator upon earth that I be not present with the Lord while I am absent from him that I enjoy not Heaven happinesse and the sight of God whilst I am in the flesh in which state no man can see him and live then God with all humble Reverence be it spoken must be the Author of it For God has planted us all in that Condition where we can only see him by Faith and Revelation as through a glass darkly and not face to face Even Adam in innocence had only this advantage to see God by 1 Cor. 13. 12. Faith and clearer Revelation but not at all by Sight And now if our Love of necessity must bear proportion to our Knowledge Impossible it is I should love God at that height whilst I am in the flesh as I can do and shall by Gods Grace I firmly hope when I see him face to face and shall know as I am known Even the souls of Adam and all just men now made perfect do far more intensely more fervently love God whom they now see and enjoy in Heaven then ever Adam did or could if he had continued still in Innocence They love him now Naturally Uninterruptedly Constantly and Immutably but Adam in Paradise Habitually and not alwaies Actually for of necessity the Acts of his Love must be interrupted at least whilst he slept and Freely and therefore Mutably as his fall does too sadly evidence Nay the very Angels that fell not but kept their first station do now more fervently love God since their Confirmation in Grace because they now Immutably love him and have had since the fall of Lucifer an Experiment of his Favour to them which the others had not § 50. With what colour of truth then can it be maintained that it must be deputed and reckoned my sin if I love not God to as high a degree in this life as is possible to be attained in the next For does not that height and perfection of Love depend purely upon the sight and enjoyment of God and the participation of Heaven happiness And is not this height and intensenesse of Love an effect at least of the happiness of the Spirits of just men made perfect And does not this wholly and absolutely depend upon Gods bounty For though the wages of sin be death yet the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Rom. 6. 23. And shall it be my sin that Gods gifts are not at my Command or within my power to purchase them Or must we say with Bellarmine that it is our sin and will be our punishment if we do not even ex condigno merit Heaven For so of necessity it must be said before it can be maintained that it must be our sin and transgression of this first and great Commandement if we love not God to that height and degree that the blessed Saints and Angels do love him in Heaven with that precise utmost height which is possible to be attained not only in this life but also in the next Add to this that the Saints and Angels now confirmed in grace do love God Naturally and Necessarily to that height that they love him and they can as well cease to see God and know God as not so to love him This is not now their election and choice but their happinesse and Crown their reward nay their Nature not their Labour and Endeavour How then can the want of that Fervour be my sin which is not within the compass of my Will and power to arrive at * Vide Davenant de Justit habit Act. c. ●1 p. 470. arg 1. He should as well have said it is our fault that now we be not immortal and glorified whilest we are in the flesh And let me tell our Refuter that he also should have said we are obliged to see God face to face whilest we are in this body as well as to have told us that the first and greatest Commandement enjoyneth us a love of God with as high a degree as is possible Jeanes hic p. 31. unto the humane Nature For I hope he will not say but that is possible to the humane Nature which Enoch and Elias not to speak of our Blessed Saviour at the right hand of God and the Spirits of just men made perfect have now attained to § 51. Indeed this assertion of Chamier is so extremly crude and absurd in that sense which the words at first view do seem to import that I had rather strain them to the meaning and purpose of Grotius and Doctor Hammond then any such monstrous Paradox should be affixed to so Judicious and learned a man Howsoever if Mr. Cawdrey and our Refuter will needs otherwise understand him as they seem in this assertion of theirs to have done which I conceive was to them the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Stone of stumbling and Rock of offence I shall leave them to defend and make it good For

the Crimination otherwise I assure you the Boldness will be unpardonable although as you somewhat insolently say you shall assume the liberty to fix it on him and the shame must light on you since you cannot make good your Charge § 24. It is true indeed the Doctor saies that Christs Love was more intense at one time then at another viz. in his Agony and dying for us more intense then in his suffering Nakedness and Hunger for us § 25. And does not the Apostle tell us the same when he saies (a) Phil. 2. 6 7 8 9. That he being in the form of God though he thought it no robbery to be equall with God yet made himself of no reputation and took upon him the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of man and being found in fashion as a man he humbled himself and became obedient unto death even the death of the Cross wherefore God also hath highly exalted him His birth his life his death were all Acts you see of Divine Love or holy Charity but the greater the lower still the Humiliation the more intense the more high the more noble Act of Divine Charity both in respect of God and us And therefore God also has proportioned his exaltation in the humane Nature to his a basement and sufferings given him the (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 6. 20. 1 Pet. 1. 18 19. People he had so dearly purchased and advanced his Name to that height that it should transcend every name besides and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father § 26. But then the Habit of Divine Love or holy Charity in Christ as of all other graces else was alwayes (b) There is no doubt but the Deitie of Christ hath enabled the nature which it took of man to do more then man in this world hath power to comprehend forasmuch as the bare essential Properties excepted he hath imparted to it all things he hath replenished it with all such Perfections as the same is any waies apt to receive at least according to the exigence of that oeconomy or service for which it pleased him in love to be made Man Luk. 2. 47. For as the parts degrees and Offices of that mysterial administration did require which he voluntarily undertook the Beames of Deity did in operatione alwaies accordingly either restrain or enlarge themselves vid. Theodoret. Iren. l. 3. advers haeres From whence we may somewhat conjecture how the Powers of the Soul are illuminated which being so inward unto God cannot chuse but be privy unto all things which God worketh and must therefore of necessity be indued with knowledge so far forth universal vid. Col. 2. 3. though not with infinite knowledge peculiar to Deity it self The Soul of Christ that saw in this life the face of God was here through so visible presence of Deitie filled with all manner of Graces and Vertues in that immatchable perfection for which of him we read it written that God with the oyle of gladness anointed him above his fellowes Vid. Esai 1. 2. Luc. 4. 18. Act. 4. 27. Heb. 1. 9. 2 Cor. 1. 21. Ioh. 2. 20 27. Hookers Eccles Policie lib. 5. §. 54. p. 298. Vid. Field of the Church l. 5. cap. 15. who from the Schoolmen has most judiciously and profoundly stated this question of the fulness of all Habitual Grace in Christ full and perfect so full and so perfect that it was not in him capable of any further addition without any possibility of want or encrease And so it must be acknowledged by all Christians when the Apostle tells us Coloss 2. 9. that in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell Col. 1. 19. So acknowledged it must be by all Christians when the Evangelist Jo. 1. 14. expresly asserts that the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father full of grace and truth and that of his fulness we have all received and that Grace for Grace Vers 16. Habitually so full he was that as the same Saint John assures us c. 3. 34. God giveth not the Spirit by measure to him § 27. Most certain it is say the (a) Quod qudem elogium ipse Christus ante suum in Coelos ascensu● sibi tribuit nor quod rem encomio isto notatam tunc reverâ possidebat cum nondum in Regni sui gloriam ingressus esset sed quia certò idque mox futurum erat ut in Imperii istius possessionem constitue retur c. Volkel de vera Relig. l. 3. c. 21. ubi late illud prosequitur Quemadmodum ad ipsius Regnum viam quandam ei mors ejus aperiebat ideoque nondum plane regnare tunc cum mortem pateretur dici potuit ita cum illius Sacerdotium idem fere reipsa sit quod ejusdem Regnum eandem mortem principium seu praeparationem quandam istius Sacerdotii in coelo demum administrandi extitisse c. Vid. Volkel de vera Relig. li. 3. c. 37. pag. 145. ubi late illud prosequitur Socinian what he will to the contrary and it might be very largely demonstrated were it not eccentrical to the present Dispute that Christ was alwaies Christ as well so in the womb as at the right hand of God For otherwise Elizabeth had never called Mary the (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luc. 1. 43. Mother of her Lord before he was yet born Nor had the Angels said unto the Shepherds at his birth Behold I bring you tidings of great joy which shall be to all people for unto you is born this day in the City of David a Saviour which is not as the (c) Quae verò ipsius Regni ratio est Ea quòd Deus eum suscitatum à mortuis in coelos assumptum à dextris suis collocavit ei potestate in coelis in terrâ omni datâ omnibus ipsius pedibus se excepto subjectis ut fideles suos gubernare tueri aeternùm servare posset Catechis Racoviens de offic Christ Reg. pag. 275. Quid an non erat sacerdos antequam in coelos ascenderet praesertim crucifixus penderet Non erat c. Ibid. de offic Christ Sacerdot pag. 291. Socinian perversely which shall be after his ascension and session at the right hand of God but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is Christ the Lord. Impossible it is he should be otherwise since he was God as well as Man from the first moment of Conception And therefore it was resolved justly against the Heretick Nestorius that his Blessed Virgin-Mother was truly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of God § 28. Whosoever then he be that against Arrius Photinus and Socinus acknowledges the Divinity of our Saviour

had not stepped in between Gods wrath and us no flesh living should be saved In this sense it is the Apostle tells us that we are by nature Ephess 2. 3. Rom. 5. 12. 1. Cor. 15. 22. Jo. 3. 3. 18. the children of wrath and all dead in Adam and our Saviour assures us that except a man be born again he cannot enter into the Kingdome of God because he that believeth not as he sayes in another place is condemned already § 22. Though then the first Covenant continues still in force as to the condemning power of it to all the sons of Adam yet it continues not in force as to Life and Justification by it Nor was it for that end that the Law and first Covenant was revived and given by Moses but onely to manifest Jos 1. 7. our guilt and the purity we fell from and our necessity of a Saviour The Law sayes the Apostle was added Gal. 3. 19. because of transgression And in another place Moreover the Rom. 5. 20. Rom. 7. 13. Gal. 3. 22. Law entred that the offence might abound and that sin might appear exceeding sinfull But now the Scripture hath concluded all under sin that the promise by Faith of Jesus Christ made to Adam and Abraham might be given to them that believe For if there had been a Law given which could have Gal. 3. 21. given life verily righteousness should have been by the Law and if righteousness come or were by the Law then Christ is dead in vain And here the same Apostle assures us that no man is justified by the Law because the Law as he sayes Gal. 3. 11. Rom. 4. 15. Rom. 8. 2. elsewhere worketh wrath and brings along with it in the same Apostles Phrase a law of sin and death § 23. The Law then as taken by our Apostle for a Covenant of works and exact unsinning obedience is no longer in force as to life and Justification by it since now not so much that it is impossible that Righteousness should be obtained by it but because Mankind is already for transgression Actually under the curse of it and he that is already damned cannot possibly be obliged not to be damned upon the self same Penalty and Censure of Damnation And I see not yet why it may not as rationally be said that even the Reprobates in Hell are still obliged by virtue of that Law or Covenant to sinless perfection upon pain of that Damnation which now they groan under and shall continue to do so as well as the lapsed sons of Adam that are already under the same fatall Curse though thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord not under the same irreversible Punishment The difference here between them is onely this that both are under the Curse of the Law but both are not under the same finall irreversible execution They are actually plunged in Hell and these yet in vià should as certainly have fallen into the same bottomless pit if the Mediator had not stepped in and procured a Respite of the Execution and a possibility to these by virtue of his Passion and Intercession through the means of a new Covenant of Faith in his blood to escape the finall vengeance of it § 24. Since then Mankind in Adam is by the tenor of the first covenant damned already there seems no reason it should stand in force to require of the condemned that Perfection of righteousness it at first required of them whilst they were in their Integrity and had Power and Grace sufficient to perform it for can their after-multiplyed sins add any whit to the certainty of their damnation by that Law and Covenant or to the Aggravation of it If it adds any thing to the certainty where then is the force of the Curse threatned If it adds to the aggravation why not also to that of the damned § 25. If it here shall be replyed these are yet but in viâ and a state of tryall and Probation but the other are now extra statum merendi and he that is dead is freed from the Rom. 7. 1 2 3. Law § 26. I shall answer this is true but then I must cry out with our Apostle Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ Rom. 7. 25. our Lord. Otherwise O wretched men that we are who Rom. 7. 24. who should deliver us from the body of this death This arises not at all from the Nature and Tenor and Condition of the first Covenant that allowed no more Respite to Man then was granted to the fallen Angels but onely from the Intercession and Mediation of the Son of God the Lamb slain Revel 13. 8. 1 Pet. 1. 20. from nay before the foundation of the world who took not on him the nature of Angels but the seed of Abraham And Heb. 2. 16. therefore since this Respite of Execution arises not at all from the first Covenant but from the Grace of the Mediatour and this further state of Tryall and Probation that here belongs to the sons of Adam of necessity supposes a new Covenant made and promised and promulgated as the Scripture testifies that it was immediately after Adams fall and Gen. 3. 15. as soon as the Curse of the first Covenant was by God the Judge pronounced and in part executed against him it evidently at least to me seems to follow that both are equall in Respect of the Curse of the first Covenant incurred though both are not equall in respect of the full and finall and irreversible execution which makes the one Capable of the blessings of a new Covenant of which the other are not § 27. If it here shall be replyed how comes it then to pass that since as the sins of Infidells are multiplyed so also shall their torments and levius Cato quam Catilina as S. Austin § 28. To this I have nothing else at present to reply but that since our Saviour assures me that he that believes not is condemned already and therefore since all not Infants excepted are dead in Adam because they sinned in him I must conclude with S. Austin that the Infidell by the tenor of the first Covenant would as certainly be damned if even in his infancy he dyed out of the Pale of the Church as in his riper years and though his punishment should be the lighter yet I know no reason in respect of the first Covenant that as he lives longer his hell shall be the hotter Nor can I for the present apprehend how this should come to pass but only upon the Promise and Promulgation of the second Covenant Not that God sent his son into the world to condemn Joh. 3. 17 18 19 20. the world but that the world through him might be saved For he that believeth on him is not condemned but he that believeth not is condemned already because he hath not believed in the Name of the onely begotten Son of God And this