Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
heaven_n	angel_n	earth_n	see_v	8,817	5	3.6156	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A95338	Truths conflict with error. Or, Universall redemption controverted, in three publike disputations. The first between M. John Goodwin, and M. Vavasour Powell, in Coleman-street London. The other two between M. John Goodwin, and M. John Simpson, at Alhallowes the great in Thames-street: in the presence of divers ministers of the City of London, and thousands of others.	Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.; Weekes, John.; Powell, Vavasor, 1617-1670.; Simpson, John, 17th cent.	1650 (1650)	Wing T3167B; Thomason E597_2; ESTC R202232	95,080	122

but what that sufficient meanes is you do not know neither will you undertake to determine Mr. Good No I will not undertake it in this Dispute Mr. Simp. Sir you are to prove that raine and fruitfull seasons are sufficient meanes to preach the Gospel Mr. Good If so be that that had been the state of the question agreed upon I would have argued to that But since we have another on foot and that agreed upon and consented to on both sides I desire to keep to that Mr. Cranf Then Mr. Simpson you are only to answer to this that Christ died for all men Mr. Simp. If you please to wave your former question and therein to falsifie that ingagement which lies upon you to prove that the workes of Creation Raine and Fruitfull season are sufficaent meanes whereby to vnderstand the Gospel we are willing to follow you in another Mr. Good Sir The ingagement that lies upon me to prove is that the Heathen have sufficient meanes to believe unto salvation And if you will take the argument it is thus If so be that Jesus Christ gave him selfe a ransom for those Heathens who have not the Ministery of the Gospel as well as for those that have then as well the one as the other have sufficient meanes unto salvation But Christ gave him selfe a ransome for those who have not the Ministery of the Gospell as well as for those that have Ergo. Mr. Simp. The minor Proposition is denyed Mr. Good I prove it thus If so be that Christ did not give himselfe a ransome for those who want the Gospel as well as for those that have it then he put a difference between men and men in giving himselfe a ansome But he did not put a difference between men and men in giving himself a ransome And therefore he gave himself a ransome as well for those who want the ministery of the Gospel as for those that have it And consequently vouchsafes a sufficiency of meanes as well to the one as to the other Mr. Simp. We deny the Minor againe Mr. Good I prove it thus If so be that Christ did put a difference between men and men in giving himselfe a ransome then this difference was put by him according to the will pleasure of God the Father But the will and pleasure of God the Father was not that Christ should put any difference between men and men in giving himselfe a ransome Ergo. Mr. Simp. I deny the Minor Mr. Good If so be that it was the will of God that Jesus Christ should put a difference between men and men in giving himselfe a ransome then this will of his was either taken up and conceived by him at that very instant of time when Christ did give himselfe for a ransome or some time before or from Eternity But such a will in God that Christ should put a difference betweene men in giving himselfe a ransome was neither canceived in him at that time when he did give him self a ransom nor befor nor from eternity Therefore there was no such will in God that such a difference should be made Mr. Simp. I answer that there was such a will in God from Eternity Mr. Good If there was no reprobation of persons according to the will of God from eternity then there could be no will in God that Christ should put a difference between men and men in dying for them But certain it is that there was no reprobation of persons from eternity therefore there was no such will in God from eternity M. Simp. I deny the minor Proposition and say that there was a reprobation of particular persons from eternity M. Good If so be there were no persons of men from eternity then there could be no persons of men reprobaetd from eternity But there were no persons of men from eternity Therefore there could be no reprobation of particular persons from eternity Mr. Simp. I answer by distinguishing thus persons are said to be either in respect of their own being in the world or else as they are in decreto divino the divine decree We say that persons were not in being as we are now upon earth But they had a being in the divine decree of God and foreknowledge of the Almighty M. Good If so be persons as they were in that decree of God were not capable of being reprobated then notwithstanding such a being they were not reprobated from eternity But persons considered as in the decree of God were not capable of being reprobated Ergo. Mr. Simp. I deny your Proposition they may be reprobated as persons having a being in the decree and foreknowledge of God Mr. Good I prove it thus If so be the decrees of God are nothing else but God himself infinite And men as they had a being from eternity it was nothing else nor no other being but God himself Then if they should be reprobated from eternity it must be God himself that must be reprobated Mr. Simp. I am ashamed to repeat your Argument Mr. Good Sir I suppose it because you are not able to answer it nor all the men on earth nor Angels in Heaven for you Mr. Cranf Vnder favour Sir this argument which you bring hath not that strength nor weight in it which you lay upon it M. Good Let him answer it then M. Cranf You see Sir how the People relish it I beseech you speak more modestly of God Mr. Good I onely shew you the absurdity of his opinion and indeed the blasphemy of it for this doth directly follow upon it There was no being from eternity but God himself all the beings that were were onely God and therefore if you say that there was a reprobation of persons from eternity it must be the reprobation of God himself which is the most horrid and blasphemous consequence of your opinion Mr. Cranf Sir I pray you had not all things a futurition in respect of the decree of God and is there no distinction in his decree in respect of voluntas and voluntatis the decree of God as it had respect to the will of his decree is one thing and as it had respect to the Decree of his Will is another Take it in this latter sence and so it doth produce another thing out of nothing Mr. Good Sir you disparage Mr. Simpson Mr. Simp. I tell you that things may have a being in the will of God which have not a being among the Creatures As in 4. Rom. 't is said that God calls things that are not as if they were Mr. Goodw. I say All things had a Being in God from Eternity but not such a Being wherein any of them were capable of Reprobation under that Being Mr. Symps Yes they had such a Being in that Decree of God that some of them might be elected and others reprobated Mr Goodw. That I denyed and my reason was this If so be that there was no man that had a Being from Eternity no creature

To give a faire Answer to a faire Demand and reasonable question I shall willingly doe it my sence therefore cleerly is this That the witnesse of Himself which God is there said not to have left Himself without by the meanes there exprest it must be not only a witnesse of his Godhead as of his power and wisdome for that was sufficiently witnessed unto them otherwise as by the fram of Heaven Earth and by the Creation and Generation of men that were then alive in the World but the witnesse which He gave of Himself or which He left not Himself destitute of it was of His grace and goodnesse and of that inclination which was in Him to shew mercy to men upon their Repentance that they might thereupon be saved it did witnesse or manifest to them that He had his Armes open to give entertainment to them and to accept of them upon their foresaking of their sins and turning aside from their wayes and workes of unrighteousnesse now this disposition in God a willingnesse and readinesse of shewing mercy interpretatively and constructively it is a Preaching of Jesus Christ unto men and that upon this accompt because that light of Reason in men which God hath given them at least before they quench it and obscure and bury it under sin and wickednesse it hath a sufficiency in it to prove by the means which God vouchsafeth unto them that there was some kinde of attonement intercession or mediation made betweene God and man otherwise it was not possible that the World should have subsisted under the sinfulnesse of the creature in that frame and state and being to the comfort of man had there not been some such Pillar said to have support it Mr. Ames I humbly crave leave to know this how its possible for us had not wee lived in an age and place where we have the Revelation and Manifestation of Jesus Christ as it is delivered to us in the Bible the Word of God by what rule should we proceed to interpret a shower of Raine or a fruitfull Season into this sence that Jesus Christ is come to save sinners M. Goodw. Look after such a manner or by such a rule of direction as the Jewes especially before the giving of the Law and as under the ceremonies of the Law they were able to pick out Jesus Christ and his satisfaction for the saving of the World by the same rule and meanes may men gather out though not particularly the Name of Jesus Christ I do not say so but that which is vertually and constructively and interpretatively and for the great end and purpose of Salvation every whit as much as the knowledge of that Name amunts unto all this I say may be learned from those gracious dispensation of the Providence of God in the World and my reason is because the reason of man and that light of understanding which God hath put into him it is able to bring him to this point and to fix him here that except some means had been used to pacifie God towards the World it was impossible that a God of that infinite Justice should endure such a World of ungodly ones such a wicked generation of men as wherewith the whole Earth was replenished from the one end of it unto the other This I say is nothing but what in a rationall and faire way may be collected and gathered by those meanes and by that light of direction which God hath ●ouchsafed unto men Mr. Ames Sir I humbly beseech you once more you are pleased to say That a reasonable Creature who never heard of the Revelation of the Gospell as we doe either by the Ministry of it by Men or by Angells from Heaven may as well gather out a Mediator interposing between the Creature and Divine Justice in a shower of Raine and a fruitfull Season as the Iewes were able to do from a Sacrifice and a Priest Mr. Goodw. No Sir that was not my Answer but this I said as that was a very improbable and unlikly way for men to have gathered out a mediator especially in those particularities which Mr. Sympson did urge in his Argument Yet look I say as there was a way and means open to the Jewes hereby to discover Iesus Christ though many of them did not finde Jesus Christ by that light so I say there is a way though I doe not say every way equall or of the same light and efficacy for the giving out of the knowledge of Iesus Christ unto men as the Iewes we speak of had yet it is of the same kinde though a dim saint and obscure way and method And to apply it to the Iewes and to the Heathen looke as the means vouchsafed unto the one and to the other to discover a Saviour and intercessour as the meanes was but weake and the light dim and faint so like were the acceptation of God even of that little which they were in a capacity to collect and gather together by this weak light it was prepared and ready for them and that according to the generall rule of his Providence and Goodnesse which is this to accept of Men according to what they have that is according to what they have power to doe and performe and not according to what they have not Mr. Ames Sir I only crave leave to add this further The different reason between the Ceremonies of the Iewes discovering a Mediator between God and them and the mean's which you say He vouchsafed unto the Gentiles seemes to lye in this That God was pleased to institute and appoint such Ceremonies and Sacrifices Temple and Worship to signifie spirituall things which were to come in the times of the Messiah And after he had instituted and appointed such things for such an end he was pleased them to comment and to gloss upon them and to give the serve of them which made the into pretation of those things easie unto the Iews But God not having declared in his Word that he hath appointed showers and fruitful seasons to be such interpreters of his minde 〈◊〉 to signifie a Mediator neither having glossed upon them I humbly desire to know how we may proceed to finde out a Saviour or to gather such a thing from them As for that which you say That a man by reason and understanding may gather much from such showers and fruitful seasons concerning the inclinable nature in God to shew mercy to a lost creature I humbly conceive that the Creature may gather and collect thus much That the great God who created the World is a God of infinite Goodness and for be drawne But that this God hath provided a Mediator to make an altonoment between him and man this I am not able to conceive how showers and fruitful seasons can discover but his declared minde and will revealed in his Word Mr Symps There hath been more spoken to this Argument then at the first was urged and therefore I conceive