Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
heaven_n day_n earth_n let_v 5,301 5 4.4500 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A04215 A defence of the churches and ministery of Englande Written in two treatises, against the reasons and obiections of Maister Francis Iohnson, and others of the separation commonly called Brownists. Published, especially, for the benefitt of those in these partes of the lowe Countries. Jacob, Henry, 1563-1624. 1599 (1599) STC 14335; ESTC S107526 96,083 102

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

bringeth to cure it but it hath no other effect saue onely to manifest to vs so much the more that the soare of their Assemblies cannot be healed In our former answere we first tooke 3. Exceptions against them comparing together their profession and practise then we alleadged 9. Reasons directly concluding the falshood of the Assumption H. IACOB BEfore I examine this your answer I would desire you and all others to note that all your Exceptions and Reasons with your defence of them hereafter following doe consist of these three generall pointes 1. That euerie person in England holding our publik faith is no true Christian 2. That all the Christians and Churches in King Edwards time and namelie Maister Cramner M. Ridley M. Hooper M. Latimer M. Philpot M. Saunders M. Rogers M. Taylor c. were all lims of Antichrist and no true Christians 3. That euery soule in England is convicted in conscience that the Praelacie is vnlawfull and vntollerable The First of these is our maine question and the grounde of all our reasoning which you gainsay The Second though it be not expreslie spoken yet it is directlie euidently and vndeniably concluded by all euery of your arguments against vs. As in the seueralls hereafter we shal see The Third you are driuen vnto for defence of your former Assertion which else falleth to the grounde And this you affirme flatly in your defence of your 1.6 and 7. Reasons Nowe my desire is that all men would take notice of these your 3 Assertions and consider indifferentlie vvhether they proceede from an honest a sober or a Christian minde And you M. Iohnson if you list hereafter to say any more defende these 3. pointes directly and plainly that your ansvveres may be briefer and more certen then now they are Novve I come to the particular examination of your former answerere First you say You omitted the Proposition before not for the soundnes of it but only because you would see howe I meant it Why He that hath but halfe an eye may see the meaning of those vvordes where is no darknes nor doubtfulnes of sence at all What fault finde you in it nowe Forsooth first a want in the Assumption then vntruethes both in the Proposition and Assumption of my Sillogisme There wanteth you say that I should expresse in the Assumptiō That our Assemblies be companies gathered togeather in the doctrines ordinances which we all by lawe publiquely professe and practise Who but a wrangler would not vnderstand that I meant so much Nay doe not my expresse wordes imply asmuch vvhen I say We by lavve publiquely professe and practise them Then are not our Assemblies vvhich are by lavv gathered together in this profession povver Fy for shame these are sencelesse cauilations But because vvhat in me lyeth I vvould not haue you any more to stumble at a strawe I haue to satisfie you vvithall Not that the Argumēt is vnsound without this addition But because the Reader may see howe you will play at a smal game rather then sit out vt aiunt novve added those words to the Assumption aforesaid in a contrarie letter which you desire viz. and our publike assemblies are therein gathered togeather Secondly you say that my proposition meaneth that what soeuer is held togeather and ioyned with that which otherwise might make a true Christian or a true Church Yet notwitstanding they are so to be reputed as if there were no such additions or comixtures O strange dealing in all my writing I haue no such worde no silable no letter sounding to that sence I haue directly contrary in my answere to your Fourth Reason as your self noteth there Yet yow M. Iohnson with out al shame in the view of the world doe Father on me this foule vntruth and most sencelesse errour in your first entrance Further where as it seemeth you reproue my Proposion requiring to to haue it set thus Whatsoeuer is sufficient to make a particuler man a true Christian and hath nothing added with it distroying the foundation of faith That is sufficient to make a company so gathered togither a true Church You must know Mr. Iohnson that that were an idle vaine addition for wheresoeuer there are any such things added distroying faith there whatsoeuer else seemeth sufficient indeed it is not sufficient to make a true Christian Wherefore nodum in scirpo quaeris this is to finde a knot in a rush Thus much concerning the trunes of my Proposition The Assumption examined by the Exceptions and Reasons following Lastly you come to deny my Assumption or rather to maintaine your denyall heretofore giuen Where first note that by denying my assumption yovv affirme the first generall poinct noted in this beginning That euery particuler person in England holding our publike faith here is not true Christian Which O Lorde who would not tremble to thinke on Euen that which this man aboue two yeares a goe affirmed and now againe aduisedly and wilfully defendeth I take heauen and earth to record this day whether this be not desperate madnes yea or no. But let vs examine your exceptions and reasons against my Assumption more particularly we shall see what stuffe it is Your first exception against the same is as followeth Maister Iohnsons I. Exception against the former Assumption with Maister Iacobs Replies to the same EXCEPTION I. FIrst let here be considered the 19. Article of that doctrine and booke which is alleaged by themselues for their defence and see if their profession and practize be not contrary one to an other Yea whether euen by their owne doctrine and confession conteyned in that booke it be not monifest that they haue not a true visible Church of Christ The words of the Article are these The visible Church of Christ is a Congregation of faithfull men in the which the pure word of God is preached Artic. 19. and the Sacraments be duely ministred according to Christs ordinance in all those things that of necessitie are requisite to the same These are their owne wordes and doctrine Now if they cannot proue their Assemblies to be such they may see that their own witnesses euen their own doctrine book alleadged giue verdict against thē If they can proue them to be such where and what are their proofes touching the particulers mentioned in this their owne discription of a visible Church of Christ H. IACOB his I. Reply to the 1. Excep THis his first Exception is the 19. Article of this very book which we alleage wherein a visible Church is discribed to be a Congregation where the pure word is preached and Sacramentes ministered according to all those thinges that of necessitie are requisite Now this discription he reiecteth not but our practise saith he is contrary and therefore we haue no true visible Churches nor Christians I answer wherin is it contrarie in what things that of necessite are requisite doth not all this Christian world see