Selected quad for the lemma: father_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
father_n	eternal_a	ghost_n	holy_a	29,948	5	5.9119	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46809	The blind guide, or, The doting doctor composed by way of reply to a late tediously trifling pamphlet, entituled, The youngling elder, &c., written by John Goodwin ... : this reply indifferently serving for the future direction of the seducer himself, and also of those his mis-led followers, who with him are turned enemies to the word and grace of God : to the authority of which word, and the efficacie of which grace are in this following treatise, succinctly, yet satisfactorily vindicated from the deplorably weak and erroneous cavills of the said John Goodwin in his late pamphlet / by William Jenkyn ...	Jenkyn, William, 1613-1685.	1648 (1648)	Wing J645; ESTC R32367	109,133	166

how it is written Consult with the places in the Margin and you will finde that the matter substance precious counsell c. contained in the Scripture are proved to be things to bee beleeved because they are written yeeld your self to that evident Scripture Joh. 20.21 These things are written that ye might beleeve that Jesus is the Christ the Sonne of God c. The rativ or ground of beleeving this precious truth That Christ is the Son of God is its revelation by writing So Act. 14.24 Rom. 15.4 Job 5.47 If therefore you deny as you do in terminis the written Word to be the word of God what formall object hath faith i.e. to whom or what will you send me for the building my confidence upon the matters and counsels of the Scripture c. Touching this I added in Busie Bishop the testimonies of Tertullian Ireneus Aug. Chrisost c. Bu. Bish p. 24. Is not every man as a man a debtor to God and a creature tyed to obedience and doth his making himselfe insufficient to discharge the debt discharge him from payment it would follow that if such impotency excused from duty and from the obligation of the the command that those men were most excusable that were most sinfull and had by long accustoming themselves to sin made themselves most unable to leave and forsake sinne nay if by reason hereof God did not command obedience from them it would follow that such did not sinne at all for where there is no precept there is no transgression and so according to you by a mans progresse in sin he should make himselfe cease to be sinfull Bus Bish p. 29. In your next prove 1. That they who perish have power to beleeve The Scripture denyeth it when it saith The world cannot receive the Spirit c. Joh. 14.17 2. Prove if a man hath not power that this impotency is meerely poenall as inflicted by God so involuntarily indured by man for that is the nature of a punishment properly so called the Scripture saith Man hath found out many inventions Eccl. 7. c. Gen. 6.12 All flesh hath corrupted its way c. Bus Bish p. 31. I suppose by your naturall man who you say doth things to which God hath annexed acceptation you meane the same man the Apostle speaks of Rom. 8.8 The man in the flesh now that man cannot please God though your naturall man doth things acceptable to God Invert not gods and Natures order First let the tree be good and then the fruit Bus Bish p. 34. What stuffe is here have all the world sufficient meanes of beleeving these two 1. That God is 2. That he is a rewarder of them that diligently seeke him Paraeus informes you that those two heads of saith that God is and that God is a rewarder of them that diligently seeke him are not to be understood Philosophically but Theologically that the eternall God is Father Sonne and Holy Ghost and that be is a rewarder of them that seeke him Evangelically by faith in Christ with the benefits of the Gospell pardon adoption sanctification glory And can heathens by the sim moone and s●arres do this Can they by the light of nature beleeve a trinity of persons in unity of essence None saith Gerrard can be led to the knowledge of God by the creatures but only so farre forth as God is their cause Now God is their cause by a divine power common to the three persons therfore by the creatures we can onely attain to knowledge of these things which are common to the three Persons and not to the knowledge of the distinction of Persons Ger. de Trin. and can the heathens by the workes of creation have the discovery of a Mediator and have Christ made knowne to them and beleeve in him I am sure you nsver learned this of the Apostles who saith that faith cometh by hearing Rom. 10. or are you of Smalcius the Socinian his judgment who saith that faith in Christ is not alwaies required to justification but faith simply and he proves it out of this very Sctipture that you have alleadged Heb. 11.6 for the faith of heathens c. Bus Bish p. 36. The Fathers assert the being and nature of free-will only and not its power to supernaturall good in all the passages which you alleadge out of them Though Austin and Jerom against the Manichees maintained the nature of free-will yet 't is as true that against the Pelagians they denyed the abilities of free-wil to good supernaturall Of this latter you wisely take no notice at all as making directly against you though there are hundreds of instances to that purpose to be found in them And thus the learned and orthodox Divines of the reformed Churches abroad understand Austin and Hierom when alleadged by Papists and Arminians as writing for free-will Rivetus and Walleus two famously learned writers among the Protestants shall suffice for instances Baily the Jesuit objected out of Austin to prove free-will that very place against the Protestants which you alleadge against the Ministers The words of Austine which both Baily and your selfe alleadge are these Si non estliberum arbitrium quomodo Deus judicat mundum If there be no free-will how doth God judge the world This place Rivet understands onely of the naturall being of free-will For saith he if man were turned into a stone or a block or a bruit creature be should be exempted from Gods Judgement but since when he acts out of deliberation be chuseth and willeth what pleaseth him he deservedly gives account of his actions Riv. to 2. p. 183. The place you alleadge out of Jerom is this Frustra Blasphemas ingeris c. Thou blasphemest in vaine buzzing in the eares of the ignorant that we condemne free-will And Waleus T. 2. p. 95. answers Corvinus in these words of Hierom. Frustra c. but then he gives the reason why and how both be and Hierom did allow of free-will not in regard of its abilities to good supernaturall But because saith Waleus He denyeth man to be created according to the Image of God who denies him to be adorn'd with the naturall faculty of free-will Bus Bish p. 46. In Bus Bish I set downe the agreement betweene the Fathers and the Subscribers concerning the doctrine of the adjutory of grace at large and concluded thus I should gladly be informed by you in your next what the Ministers adjutorium differs from that held forth by the Fathers and what they hold tending more toward a compulsory then these Fathers here and in hundreds of other places have written but he answers nothing Your mistake here is pittifull for the great question between Hierom Augustine and Pelagius was not whither the will did stand in need of the adjutory of grace for the performance of good but what kinde of adjutory it was of which the will did stand in need and wherein grace was an adjutory and I alleadge sundry

which every good worke is done you both delude your selfe and your followers for he by this adjutory expresseth himselfe to meane not such an one by which a man is left to himselfe to susser conversion to be wrought or not to be wrought but such an adjutory by which it is infallibly wrought Vid. Aug. de cor gra●c 12. Aliud est adjutorium sine quo aliquid n●n fit aliud est ad u●orium quo aliquid fit nam sine alimentis c. There 's an adjutory saith he without which a thing is not done and an ad utory by which a thing is done we cannot live without food and yet neither doth he live by food who will dye though he hath it so that food is an adjutory without which we cannot live not by which it is that we d●e live but when blessednesse is bestowed upon a man he is f●rthwith made blessed this is an adjutory not only without which a thing is not done but by which that is done for which it is given because if blessednesse be given to a man he forthwith bec●mes blessed and if it be not given he shall never be blessed but it followes not that a man shall live by having food onely without food he cannot live If your adjutory be the same with Austines tell me I charged you from your accusing of the Ministers with Manicheism that you understood not what it was 1. In the next Section you give me an account therefore of your profound knowledge what Manicheism is Yo. Eld. p. 53. and having cited a sentence out of Augustine Serm. deaemp 191. They erre who with Manicheus affirme that a man cannot avoyd snne c. from this passage you say it clearly appeares that one notorious straine of the Manichean errour was this that men by the eternall unchangeable irresistible decree of God are put into or left in such a condition wherein it is impossible but that they should sinne Answ Who is the illiterate soule now had you required from me an account of Manicheism out of the Fathers and had I given you such an ignorant answer as this I had deserved to have changed my Seraglio for the Ware-house From whom have it you that the Manichees held that man was put into or left in such a condition of sin by any decree of God Is this your knowledge of Manicheism had you held your peace haply you would have been accounted wise in this point but now Schollars are ashamed of you Did the Manichees hold that a man could not avoyd sinne from the unchangeablenesse of Gods decree Jerom would have inform'd you better Hier ad Ctes. Manichaeorum est hominum damnare naturam liberum auferre arbitrium It is Manicheism to condemne the nature of man and to dispoile it of freo will and Augustine haer 46 Peccatorum Originem non libero arbitrio voluntatis sed substantiae tribuunt gentis adversae The Manichees asserted impossibility to avoyd sinfrom the very being of nature in it selfe which could not but be bad and their Principles were 1. Peecatum esse substantiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per se viventem subsistentem non autem tantum qualitatem quandam affectionemque vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentis a ratione aversae quae substantiae superuenerit that sinne was a substance living and subsisting of it selfe and not onely a quality or an affection of the minde averse from reason which did supervene 2. They held voluntatem malè agendi nobis à naturâ infitam esse non ex rebellione nosirâ accensitam vel inobedientia natam Dan. de haer c. 46. That the will of doing evill was from the very nature not fetcht from rebeltion und disubedience Aug. l. 4 c. 3. Contra duas ep Pel. Asserunt malam esse naturam quae●im mutari nullo modo potest A me nunquam audies malam esse naturam for Austin chargeth them to hold that Malum was ex 〈◊〉 nesoio quâ fomper m●la that sin was from a kinde of nature alwaies evill And Jerome saith they held That nature it self was evill and could by no means be changed he saying in that place That no man ever heard him say so Evident it is that the Manichees asserted such a necessity of sin as that it was repugnant to the very being of nature not to sin and blush you not to cast such a fencelesse imputation upon the Ministers of Christ Did they whom you accuse of Manicheism ever say or thinke that sin was from any nature unchangeably evill or that we sin by a necessity of nature or in regard of the unchangeable decree of God that nothing can come to passe contingently so as that it would have been against the nature of the creature to have acted otherwise bringeth not learned * Resp Apol p. 23. Piscator the instance of breaking the legs of Christ saith he not that though it were determined by the decree of God that his legs should not be broken Quae necessitas illius impediat voluntatem quae ●anta vis odio digna imperet acere ut non quod vult sed quod non vult odit facere compellatur Respondebit tu quis 〈◊〉 c. yet by the nature and will of the Souldiers such a thing might have been And the last mentioned Father thus meets with your argument from the unchangeablenesse of Gods Decrees Aske the Apostle saith he quae necessitas c. what necessity hinders the will what force commands it to do things worthy of batred that it should be compelled to do not what it would but what it would not and bates to do Will not saith Jerome the Apostle answer O man who art thou that disputest against God shall the thing formed say to him that formod it Why hast thou made me thus Object to God a stronger calumny for 't is said Esau and Jacob being yet in the wombe he hated the one and loved the other and Austine to whom the Pelagians objected that he brought in Manicheism by the Doctrine of the necessity of the spirit the making of which objection is pure Goodwinism in severall places saith Vid. vos hist Pel. l. 3. p. 2. that the Catholici go in a middle way betweene Manicheism and Pelagianism Contr. du ep Pel. l. 4. c. 3. A Catholike so asserts free will that he saith the sin of Angels and men came not from I cannot tell what nature alwaies evill which is none but from the will it self and this overthrowes the heresie of the Manichees nor therefore that the captive will can attaine to a saving liberty but by the grace of God and this over throwes the heresie of the Pelagians And Contr. du ep Pel. l. 2. c. 5. Sic asserit Catholicus liberum arbitrium ut non ex natura nescio quâ quae nulla est sed ex ipso arbitrio Coepisse dicat angeli hominis