Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	ghost_n	holy_a	scripture_n	5,819	5	6.0509	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90866	Theos anthrōpophoros. Or, God incarnate. Shewing, that Jesus Christ is the onely, and the most high God· In four books. Wherein also are contained a few animadversions upon a late namelesse and blasphemous commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrewes, published under the capital letters, G.M. anno Dom. 1647. In these four books the great mystery of man's redemption and salvation, and the wayes and means thereof used by God are evidently held out to the capacity of humane reason, even ordinary understandings. The sin against the Holy Ghost is plainly described; with the cases and reasons of the unpardonablenesse, or pardonablenesse thereof. Anabaptisme, is by Scripture, and the judgment of the fathers shewed to be an heinous sin, and exceedingly injurious to the Passion, and blood of Christ. / By Edm. Porter, B.D. sometimes fellow of St. John's Colledge in Cambridge, and prebend of Norwich.	Porter, Edmund, 1595-1670.; Downame, John, d. 1652.	1655 (1655)	Wing P2985; Thomason E1596_1; ESTC R203199	270,338	411

the very least sin is liable to eternall death except it be confessed and in this life in some measure repented But I proceed CHAP. XVII Whas is meant by a sin unto death the judgment of the Fathers and the Ancient expositdrs therein and the discipline of the primitive Church therunto correspondent that the greatest sins both have bin actuallie and so may be pardoned in what sence the Fathers called some sins venial and some Mortal THere is a sinne unto death I do not say he shall pray for it If any words in the whole sacred Scripture will bear this exposition and make good this Doctrine That there is any sinne at all which once committed cannot possibly upon any terms or condition whatsoever be remitted not upon confession or repentance and forsaking and renouncing it and after it adhering to Gods Truth and his Precepts and that even to death and martyrdome nor upon all these together This saying is most likely to bear it A sinne unto death and not to be prayed for which words require a very diligent Explication being of so great weight and concernment Lord Jesus send thy Light and thy Truth A sinne unto death This sin unto death I conceive not to be intended of any particular sin whether it be absolute Atheisme or the blasphemy of Ar●us denying the Godhead of Christ or of Eun●mius denying the Holy Ghost or totall Apostacie from Christianity or Adultery Idolatry witchcraft murther sedition or any of these grand sins mentioned Gal. 5. 19. such as the Fathers do usually ●in som sence call sins Mortall Mortiferous and Capitall My reason is because it may be made apparant by Scriptures and the Records of the Church that particular men who have sinned these sins severally have bin by Gods mercy and his castigations reduced to renounce their errours and to forsake their sins For many of those sins were seen in King Manasses 2 Chron 33. Who yet was converted and humbled himself greatly and God was intreated and we know that many Heathens Atheists Apostates and ●rrians have Paulinus in vita Ambrosii n. 3. Athan. to 2 page 448. n. 17. bin reduced to Confession of their sins and to repentance of their Arrianism● and those who have not bin actually reduced yet during their naturall lives were in a condition reducible if grace sufficient and prevalent had bin given so that their conversion was not absolutely impossible Beza finding fault with distinction of sinnes into Beza in lo● ve●iall and mortall as the Schoolmen sometimes use it for which he had good reason affirmeth that it is absurd to say that mortall sins are utterly left without all hope of pardon and yet he thinketh the sinn● unto death here me●tioned to be that sinne against the holy Ghost and that it is lethiferous and that the commitrers thereof cannot possibly repent which I dare not assent unto but yet he most truly affirmeth that if those who have once committed that sinne against the Holy Ghost would and could repent Certè veniam consequerentur i. certainly they would and might obtain pardon Thus he Vnto death The old Exposition of the Fathers and ancient Expositors surely is the truest and plainest and being received will quit us of many unnecessary doubts and anxi●tics and is most agreeable with the Analogie of Faith particularly with the Article of forgiv●n●sse of sinnes and co●respondeth best with the justice and mercifulnesse of God for thus they write A sinne unto death is any grand or capitall sinne such as is before mentioned out of Gal. 5. 19. in which a man liveth continueth and dieth impenitently And that it is therefore onely so called a sinne unto death because it is obdurately and impenitently continued and persevered in unto the end of our life and expiration of our souls So O●cum●nius saith Solum hoc peccatum ad mortem O●●um in loc est quod ad pae●tentiam non respicit id est Onely that sinne is a sinne unto death which never is repented Beda ●n loc And Beda saith Pecca●um ad mor●em peccatum usque ad tempora mortis protractum diximus r●cte posse intelligi est de tali magno peccato quale David commisit si pro●ractum sit usque ad mortem id est A sinne unto death may truely be understood of a sinne continued in untill the time of our death such a great sinne as David committed if we persevere in it till death So doth Saint Hierome understand it Pecc●tum ad Hier. in Evag. objurg n. 41. mo●tem est cum tempus r●●●ssionis in vitio inueni● id est A sinne unto death is when death cometh and findeth us continuing in sin So doth Saint Austine expound this very Text Peccatum Aug. Retract l. 1. c. 19. ad mor●●m est si in hac perversitate finierit ●anc ui●●m id est The sinne unto death is when a man continueth in sinne obstinately and therein endeth his life and in another place he just so expounds the sin against the holy Ghost which shall never be forgiven Non absurde intelligunt ●um peccare in Spiritum ●sse sine Aug. de fide oper c. 16. n. 79. venia reum aeterni peccati qui usque ad finem vitae ● oluerit credere in Christum id est It is no inconvenience ●o understand it thus that he sinneth against the Holy Spirit and shall not be forgiven for ever who will not at all believe in Christ as long as he liveth Just so Lyra and both gloss●s expound it Ad mortalem i. usque ad mor●em vitae quod in hac vit● non corrigitur est final●s impaenitentia si quis perseveret in eo usque ad finem vitae inclusivè i. unto death signifies to the end of our life natural that sin which is not amended in this life it is finall impenitencie when a man persevereth in sin unto the end of his life inclusively not repenting at the time of his departure but dieth impenitent By all which it appeareth that in the judgement of these Expositors the sin unto death is some of those grand sins in which a man liveth and dieth impenitently and that it is not called the sin unto death in respect of the sin it self but for the sinne●s continuance therein unto his death for the same sin which in one man is a sin unto death and shall never be forgiven in another man proves a sin not unto death but is repented of and so is pardoned that this is the judgment of St. Austin I have divers times shewed before and especially in that place alleaged by me before pag. 201. cap. 14. wh●reafter after a long discourse concerning the sin called the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit he concludeth That no sin against Vide supra ● 14. the Holy Ghost is unpardonable but only in case a man doth obstinately persevere in it without any hope or desire of pardon or care of

c Amb. n. 37. de Virgin Tull. Epist 69. Aug. Cont. Jul. l. 3. c. 13. Libri non erub s●unt your black Comment cannot blush Yet St. Austin said of Julian a P●lagian for asserting an heresie lesse dangerous then yours Puto ipsum libri tui atramentum erubescendo convertitur in minium CHAP. VIII Sheweth against this Commenter that mens soules dye not with their bodies I Must not omit your rare doctrine concerning the soules of dead men You tell us that they are void of all sense of time intervening between the time of our p. 228. 267. death and resurrection though Scriptures speak as if we should wholly live till Christs coming but 't is because thousands of years seem but as one minute to one that sle●peth or is dead so long and None are entred into heaven besides Christ c. I perceive you like not the opinion of those Anabaptists who taught the Psychopanychian or sleeping of dead mens soules neither are you arrived to the height of the Jewish S●dduces or heathenish Epicures for they denyed a resurrection which you confesse yet you have chose a fair middle way and with them you believe that our soules dye with our bodies and your confessing of the resurrection is but a reserve by which you re-inforce your doctrine of the Soules mortality for when you perceived that the words of Christ against the Sadduces made also against you when he alledged Matth. 22. 32. Exod. 3. 6. those words I am the God of Abraham to prove that Abraham then lived because Abraham's soul lived for those words were spoken long after Ab●aham was dead to avoid this you tell us that it proves onely that Abraham must one day be recalled to life so though Abraham's soul was then dead and therefore Abraham was not living yet God is the God of the living that is of the living dead Abraham because some thousands of years after Abraham may be revived you may do well to reform Church-Creeds and adde to The Resurrection of the body the resurrection of the soul which hath been alwayes omitted because the Church thought that onely the body falleth and that the body onely is c●dav●r and onely of that there will be a resurrection to the penitent Thief it is said This Luke 23. 43. day shalt thou b●w●th me in P●●●d se this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not yet come by your doctrine though sixteen hundred years are run out since St. Paul in the narration of his rapture into the third heaven confesseth he 2 Cor. 12. 2. knew not whether he were in the body or out of the body therefore in his opinion pos●●bly his soul might be in that heaven whilest his body was on earth and St. Stephen at his Marty●dome said Lord Jesus receive Acts 7. 59. my 〈◊〉 if his soul was then to dye I marvel why he would not as well say Lord Jesus receive my body but surely he thought his spirit or soul was not mortal and this is consonant with the doctrine of the best ●ilosophers who proved the soul to be separably existible because they discovered that our soul hath operations which are ino●ganical for the intellective faculty useth the body onely as an object but not as an instrument and our most excellently learned Physician and rare Philosopher Doctor Thomas Brown of Norwich hath taught us d R●lig Medici pa●t 1. sect 35. 〈◊〉 l. de Ani●● c. 44. vide 〈◊〉 l. 7. c 52. 〈◊〉 Hes●ch●●m in vita Aris●●ae Epimenidis ● 4● 46. That in the dissecting of a man no Organ is found proper to the Reasonable Soule and that in the brain of man there is nothing of moment 〈◊〉 then in the Cranie of a ●east And Tertullian telleth a story of one Hermotimus whose soul used to leave h●s body for a time and Evagari as his word is to wand●r abroad whilest his body lay like a dead corps and to return again till his enemies took advantage and whilest his soul was absent they burnt his body And such another story doth Origen tell of the same Orig. cont Cels l. 3. man whom he cals Clazomenius Now whether this be true or not yet it argues that in the judgment of these profound Philosophers the soul possibly may exist out of the body I perceive that the Judgment of the Church hath but little power to sway you for you snatch at any paradox though heretical that comes in your way Eusebius tells us that this very opinion Euseb hist l. 6. c. 27. of the soules dying with the body and rising again with the body was accounted heretical by the Church and that it was in an open Council confuted by Origen though Origen himself erred on the other side and St. Austin in his catalogue of Heresies calls Aust haer 83. Aug. de Ecclesiast dogm c. 15. n. 72. Basil hom de avar n. 12. Philo. de mundi opificio p. 31. n. 2. this of yours the Arabick heresie and our humane soul is by him called Anima substantiva i. e. a substautivesoul because it can subsist alone and of such men which say their soules are mortal St. B sil saith they have Animam p●rcinam a swinish soul and Philo the learned Jew saith that a man is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. a creature mortal and immortal because he hath a mortal body and an immortal soul and this the Church hath taught in all ages and is so delivered Ambr. de fide l. 2. c. 3. n. 22. by St. Ambrose That the soul of man cannot dye The sleeping of dead Saints which you read of in Scripture is meant just as their rising is not of soules but of bodies Many bodies of the Saints which slept arose Matth. 27. 52. But what think you of the soul of Christ did that die with his body No Christian that ever I heard of thought so perhaps neither do you or if you do I care not the same argument which the Apostle drawes from Christs resurrection to prove our resurrection will be as firm to prove the immortality of our soules by the immortality of his soul 1 Cor. 15. 16. If the dead rise not then is not Christ risen So if man's soul be not immortal then was not Christ's soul immortal and if Christ's soul dyed not neither will our soules dye The doctrine of the Soules immortality is so demonstrable by nature that the Ancient Christians symbols or rules of faith did not expresly declare it as an article of faith Christian because even * Si in hoc erro quòd animas hominum immortales credam libe●●èr erro hunc er●orem mihi extorqueri nolo aveo patres vestros mortuos videre Cic de Senect heathen Philosophers both confessed and proved it but yet in the later Creeds of the Church the article of Christ's descent was added for no greater cause at first that ever I could learn or discover then this as

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is his word Men indued with Gods Spirit are Deified because God is in them and as it were mingled with them and worketh in them And Athanasius saith Homines in quibus est Spiritus Deificantur Atha ad Serapion n. 26. vid. 2 Pet. 1. 4. Now in what sense our Saviour may be said to be Deified in the later times of the world who was the supream and onely God from all eternity would next be inquired CHAP. IX More concerning Deification and in what sense Christ may be said to be Deified THe Arians were in this Doctrine something more ingenuous then this Commenter though in them it was also most pernicious for they Ath. Hil. cont Arian n. 7. confessed that Christ was the Son of God because they knew that the Saints were so called and they said Christ was before time began because they believed that Angels and Devils were before the world and they called Christ by the Name of God because the Scriptures call some creature so But they would not confess him to have the same Godhead with the Father for they said that he was Deus factus made a God or Ambros de cil div c. 2. n. 26. deified and that he was the Son of God not by nature but by gift or grace and not by eternall generation but by power given as Kings are called Gods for so Saint Ambrose observeth Deus in Scripturis est Ambr. de fide l. 1. lib. 5. c. 1. n. 22 23. 1 Verus 2 Nuncupativus nam sunt qui dicuntur Dii non sunt 3 Falsus ut D●mones i. In Scripture God signifieth 1 The true God 2 Such as 〈◊〉 but called Gods and ●re not so 3 False gods of 〈…〉 this Commenter when he was argued 〈…〉 learned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this 〈…〉 they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confessed that Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But one of the ●●●pany ●●quired him further to declare how long Christ had been God and whether from Eternity at which question he seemed very angry and for present left the room Now indeed the Fathers do oftentimes apply this word to Christ and say that he was Deified and that in time also and not before his incarnation for he could never have been said to have been deified if he never had been incarnate it is only his humane nature that is said to be deified and not his Spirit or divine nature for the Word cannot otherwise be said to be deified then as he is hominified if I may have leave to use that word for Joh. 1. 14. The word was made flesh signifieth that God was made man by his incarnation and man was made God by the person I union of the divine and humane natures for so he alcame Theanth●opos and Emmanuel The reason is because when God assumed a body by his incarnation that body then became the body of God as is shewed before out of Origen and so that Orig. in Mat. tract 21. n. 41. Father expresseth himself thus Christus deificavit humanam naturam quam suscepit Christ deified that humane nature which he assumed Neither may we think so grosly of this deification as if the flesh of Christ were turned into the Go●head but onely because it is joyned to the Godhead and assumed into a personall union with it therefore the Name of God is also stamped upon it so that we may truly say the man Christ is God and yet the body and soul of Christ still are and for ever will be creatures In Aug. Epi. 221. this sense St. Austin saith Homo versus est in Deum n●c amisit naturam Man is become God and yet man did not lose his humane nature and thus Athanasius saith Archangeli semper antea adoraban● Filium sed nunc Atha Orat. 2. cont 2. Arian n. 5. Jesum adorant incarnatum carne qu●m de●fi●averat The Archangels did alwaies before the incarnation worship the Son of God but they worship him now in that flesh which by assuming it he now hath deified For now it is the flesh of God as the Scripture calleth his blood the blood of God Act. 20. 28. and so the same Father useth th●s word divers times in the same sense g Atha orat 2. cont Ar. n. 5. h. Id. ser 4. cont Arian n. 7. Non deificatus fuisset homo nisi verbum fuisset incarnatum And h. Christus carnem assumendo hominem deificavit The manhood could not have been deified if the Word had not been incarnate and Christ deified man by assuming flesh St. Austin writing upon those words Paul an Apostle of Jesus Christ not of men nor by man Gal. 1. Gal. 1. 1. 1. Aug. exp in Gal. in praefa● n. 97. 1. saith 1. Paulus missus est per Christum jam totum Deum quia ex omni parte immortalem That Paul is said not to be called by man because Christ was at that time wholly God because now he was perfectly immortall so he fastned this deification or immortality 2. Aug. Retract l. 1. c. 21. only on his humane nature for his divine nature was the immortall God from all eternity and Theodoret upon those words God hath highly exalted him Phil. 2. 9. saith Est de carne quae deificata est nam dominus Theod. Dial. in confu n. 12. gloriae non dicitur glorificari 'T is meant of the flesh of Christ deified for as he is the Lord of glory he cannot be exalted deified or more glorified So Origen Orig. in Levit. hom 3. saith of a Levitical sacrifice that it signified Carnem Christi in coelis deificandam that the flesh of Christ in heaven was to be deified and this deifying the flesh of Christ is said to be done in heaven because there it was glorified and immortall and on earth he is said to be deified because of the Hypostaticall union of his 3. Pet. Diac. apul Fulg. n. 2. 2 natures whereby his flesh was indeed Caro Dei the flesh of God By thus distinguishing the two natures in Christ the ancient Fathers answered the objections of old hereticks made against the eternall divinity of Christ for in the same sense that the Son of God is said to be Phil. 2. 9. Eph. 1. 20. Mat. 28. 18. Act. 3. 13 15. deified he is also in Scripture said to be exalted to be set far above all Angels and Principalities to be made the head of the Church to sit at the right hand of God to have a name given him above all names that are named That all power is given him in heaven and in earth that God raised him from the dead and that Jesus is made an high Priest for ever all these sayings and many more of this ●ind are to be understood of the humane nature of Christ but cannot be verified of his divine nature Athanasius doth in generall give us this excellent rule m Athan. Ser. 4. cont Ar. n. 7. n. ib. Quae Christus

who is in three distinct persons or properties is one in Godhead and in that one Godhead the three persons are one and as Austins word is Vnissimi this was the judgment of Eusebius touching the apparition and the Godhead of the Son and Eusebius said no more in this point then divers other Fathers said also both before Eusebius and after him as is next to be shewed CHAP. II. That the most high God appeared visibly to the Patriarchs in the Person of the Son and not in the Person of the Father as the Ancients thought THe Fathers in their Expositions of these places in Scripture where it is said No man hath seen God at any time John 1. 18 and yet Iacob said I have seen God face to face Gen. 32. 30. who was therefore called Israel i. Seeing God or prevailing with God and the place Peniel i. the presence of God these seeming contradictions are by them thus reconciled Tertullian Tert. de Trin. n. 28. saith Deus Pater inuisibilis sed Deus Filius visibilis descendere solitus God the Father is invisible but God the Son is visible and used to descend If it be objected that the Book de Trinitate was not Tertullians which is an excellent and learned book Yet that this was Tertullions opinion appeareth in another Id. cont Marc. lib. 3. undoubted book where he saith Christus Abrahamo apparuit in veritate carnis s●d n●ndum nata i Christ appeared to Abraham in the flesh which flesh or body was not then born of the Virgin Clemens Alex. saith as much of the apparition of God to Iacob Clem. in Paedag l. 1. c. 7. Jacob luctatus est cum Deo Verbo nondum homo facto Iacob wrastled with God the Word before he was Incarnate Now we know that onely the second Person is called the Word and Christ And this was also the opinion of Origen who saith that our Lord Iesus Christ before Orig. in Eze. ho. 6. he assumed our flesh descended to the holy Patriarks and was with Moses And again he saith That Esaias was therefore sawn asunder by the Iews because Id. in Esa ho. 1 he had said I saw the Lord sitting upon a Throne Isay 6. 1. Iustin Martyr also saith Deus Pater non dicitur venire Just dial cum Try n. 26. in locum sed Deus Filius the Father is not said to come into a place but God the Son is said and that God the Son was seene by the Patriarks and this was also the Opinion of Irenaeus and he giveth a reason Iren. l 4. c. 37. for it thus God the Son was often seen by men least men should not beleeve that there were any god at all but God in the person of the father was never seen least men by reason of familiaritie should contemne God or think that there could be no God but such an one as is corporeal and visible Thus you see that this opinion was not new in Eusebius time nor was by him first invented or singly mointained for many his Contemporaries were of the same judgment and they also which lived and writ after the death of Eusebius for this was the Doctrine of Athanosius and Atha Orat. Cont. Arion n. 8. Hil. de Trin. l. 4. Epiph. haer 65. Theod. hae f. 6. l. 5. n. 17. Mat. 11. 27. 1. Hilarius who both of them lived at the same time with Eusebius and the same was afterwards delivered by Epipha●ius and Theodoret and the scripture seems to favour this exposition for it is said Ioh. 6. 46. Not that any man hath seen the Father save he which is of God i none have seen the Father but the Son of God but it is no where said that no man hath seen the Son for the Father is not seen but in the Son and God the Son was seen in his assumed manhood and therefore when the disciples desired to see the Father our saviour tould them he that hath seen me hath seen the Father Ioh. 14. ● that is God who is the father can not otherwise be visible but in the Son not in him but by the assuming of humane nature by which God becomes visible who in his pure God head is invisible and he that seeth God the Son in the flesh seeth the self same God who is the Father although the person of the Father was not incarnate yet the same God is incarnate in Christ for Col. 1. 15. Christ is the image of the invisible God that is as Beza noteth Christ is he in whom only the Father doth manifest and shew himself visible so he that sees God the Son sees God the Father for both persons are one God By what hath bin said it may appeare common that opinion of the primitive Christians was that it was the person of God the Son which appeared to the Patriarks not the person of God the Father Now because these ayings are hard to understand I think it will not be amisse to discourse the 2 questions following first how God is said to be invisible and how yet he hath bin and may be seen by mortal men Secondly seing there is but one God how it may be said that the Father hath not bin seen and yet the Son hath bin seen In which discourse I will not promise the reader full Satisfaction but ● doe promise him my indeavour CHAP. III. How God is said to be invisible What is meant by the face and the after parts of God HOw the Invisible God hath bin seen by mortal Eyes and in what sence he is said to be both Invisible 1. Quest and Visible will be worthy of our inquisition because the right understanding therof is pertinent to the doctrine of Man's redemption by the incarnation of God and will serve for reconciliation of some Scritures which at the first hearing may seeme to contradict one another for in the old Testament it is said Ex. 33. 11. The Lord spake unto Moses race to face But presently after in the same Chapter ver 20. God saith Thou canst not see my face for no man shall see me and live and it followes ver 23 thou shalt see my back-parts Yet before this Iacob had said Gen. 32. 30. I have seen God face to face and my life is preserved but in the new Testament it is said No man hath seen God at any time Joh. 1. 18. And againe 1 Joh. 4. 12. And S. Paul cals God invisible Col. 1. 15. and 1 Tim. 1. 17. For explication of these Scriptures it is to be understood that when God is called Invisible it is meant of the pure Godhead because the Essence Nature substance or divinitie is not visible by mortal Eyes in this sence S. Cyprian saith Deus est visu clarior tactu purior i the Majestio of the Godhead dazeleth all mortal Cyp. de idoorum vanitate ● 77. eyes and senses and thus neither the Father nor the Son nor

is applied to a Man S. Basil saith Baptismus est similitudo Basil de Bapt. lib. 1. n. 18. Crucis mortis sepulturae r●surrectionis i Baptisme is the similitude or representarion of the Crosse death burial and resurrection of Christ He that will have two Baptismes doth implie a similitude of two deaths Christ died but once and wee in our Baptisme dyed with him Christ dieth no more nor we by Baptisme can dye any more with him Theophilact so expoundeth Theoph. in loc these words He that will be twide Baptized doth therby make a representation of two Deaths and two Crucifyings of Christ And put him to an open shame Because it is ignominious and a great undervaluing of that one most precious and alsufficient Sacrifice of Christ to Imagine that his once dying is not Satisfactorie to the Justice of God for all our sins both before and after Baptisme Therfore it must needs follow that it is also Ignominious to his said death for any Man to represent or apply two deaths of Christ to himself by two Baptismes for as his once dying is a sufficient redemption so one application of it to our selves by one Baptisme is a sufficient application If therfore by sin we fall away from the benefit of Christs death by suffering sin to live and raigne in us having once died unto sin Sacramentally by Baptisme we must returne to the benefit therof by repentance and mortification of sin and not by a new or second Baptisme For the earth which drinketh in the raine c. vers 7. 8. Here is a second reason alleaged against re Baptization 2. Reason taken from the similitude of the earth with Man for the earth which hath bin watered by raine from Heaven and dressed by the husbandman if it bring forth good fruite answerable to its watering and dressing it is a signe that the blessing from God still continueth on it Even that blessing wherwith it was at the Creation blessed when it was said Gen. 1. 11. Let the earth bring forth grasse and the fruit tree But if after this watering and dressing it beareth only weeds thorns and briers then a new watering will not help it but make it worse by giving a new and fresh aliment whereby those Weeds and Thorns will be increased and grow stronger watering is not a meanes to kill them or to extripate them So that Christian whose soule hath been watered with Baptismall Grace and dressed with holy doctrines of repentance and faith toward God and hath been instructed in the certainty of the resurrection and of Judgment eternall and yet for all this bringeth no fruites of Righteousnesse and Holinesse but contratily aboundeth luxuriantly in all manner of carnall v●ces let him not think that these weeds and thorns of his soul can be mortified or killed by a second baptismall watering Which if it should be applyed would rather accumulate higher and increase his sins then diminish them even as rain doth weeds because such a second Baptism will be accounted ●s a second crucifying the Son of God and shaming him by undervaluing his own most precious death so as it is before said and as the Earth being cursed B●ing●th forth thorns and thist●●s G●n 3. 18. So that baptized Ambro. in loc One who bringeth forth no better fruit is nigh unto cursing and like unto Thornes his end is to be burnt He saith but nigh unto Cursing not yet altogether accu●sed and whose end is to be burnt yet not presently thrown into the fire for as St. Ambrose expounds it Combustio non crit nisi quis in fin●m permane●t in peccatis suis In this exposition of this Scripture all this while the reader doth not find any imposibility of repencance of renuing or of remission and pardon of the grand blasphemy the impossibility here mentioned ●s only an impossibility of renovation and rep●ntance by a second baptism If this exposition be admitted it will quit us of a great deal of trouble which some Expositors have occasioned and thereby much perplexed many mens mindes How well or ill other writers of late have expounded this place I take not upon me to censure nor am I so wedded to this as to propose it Magisterially but with submission to my Superiors this may be true though others are not false for the Character which St. Austin setteth on the Mosaicall Scriptures and Aug. confes lib. 12. c. 31. 32. their Expositors may serve for all other Scriptures Cum alius dix●rit hoc sensit Moses quod ego et alius dicit imò illud quod ego cur non utrumque dixero sensisse id ibid. utrumque verum est and again he saith Moses sensit quicquid veri hic potuimus invenire et quicquid nondum possumus invenire whatsoever truth may probably be gathered out of a Scripture agreable with the faith and profitable may with humility be submitted unto as if it were the true meaning of that most wise Spirit by whom it was inspired who hath so composed the Scriptures in such a temper as may be sutable to the various senses of men although some see more in them then others have discerned my humble prayer shall be with him Domine nec fallar in Scripturis nec fallam ex eis i Aug. confes l. 11. cap. 2. The Lord grant that I may neither be deceived in the meaning of Scriptures nor by Scriptures deceive others CHAP. VII A review of those words Heb 6. 4. and some doubts cleared ●concerning the former Exposition what moved the Apostle to handle the Doctrine of Baptism and so strictly to forbid Anabaptisme in this Epistle to the Hebrews THe summe of the former Exposition is That if a man fall from baptismall Grace he must nor expect a restoring thereunto by a Second baptisme this place being the chief in Scripture by which Anabaptism or Rebaptization is expresly inhibited though something obscurely It would now be inquired whether this Word Inlightned in this place may not signifie those that are instructed or chatechised onely and not those that are baptised and this because some think that instruction in the Christian doctrine is here principally meant for that the custome of the Church was that in Adulto baptism which was the baptizing of people when they were in yeares of discretion catechising ever went before baptism To this I answer that in the Ancient Church language it cannot appear to me that any were called Illum●nati i the Inlightned before they were actually baptized although they were ever so exactly instructed and known to be very learned in Christian Doctrine for we find that many were chosen and compelled to be Bishops before they were baptized as Eus●bius Naz. orat 19. 20. Soz. l. 7. c 8. Ruffin hist l 2. c. 11. Soz lib. l●b 6. c. 〈◊〉 Bishop of Caesaria in Ca●padocia who was the Predecessor of St. Basil and after him Nectar●us was chosen Bishop of Constantinople by Theo●osius

Porphyrian in denying the Godhead of Christ and followeth the Heresies of Cerinthus the Maniches and Arius and acteth for Antichrist and Turcisme The Charactor of Socinus Of the Grand Antichrist and his numerous Corporation which is the Mysticall body of iniquitie and of their preachers Chapter VIII Of the Vnion of the Godhead and Manhood in Page 52 the Person of Christ and that the two Natures once united continue for ever inseparable The difference between the Existence of the Godhead in Christ and its Existence in all creatures Of the mutuall communication of properties between the Divine and Humane Natures in Christ The Heresie of Nestorius his life condemnation banishment and exemplarie death How holy Men are said to be Deified by partaking of Divine Graces and conforming to Gods will Chapter IX The Commenters blasphemous conceit of Christs Page 33 Deification In what sense Christ may be truely said to be Deified in time who was the onely God from all Eternitie The true sense of diverse sayings in Scripture concerning Christs Exaltation How the Sonne of God comes to be called Christ Chapter X. How those Scripturall sayings are to be understood Page 37 which mention the abasing or minoration of Christ the Sonne of God An Exposition of 1 Cor. 15. 24. Concerning Christs delivering up the Kingdome and reigning till judgement and his subjection afterwards Of which see more in the 2 Section of this Chapter Chapter XI Why the unpardonable Sinne is fastned rather Page 52 on the deniers of the Godhead of the Sonne then on them that deny the Godhead of the other Persons in the Scriptures Expression Of the form of words used at Baptisme diversly mentioned in Scripture and the reason of that diversitie That Christ mediateth for us in Heaven not verbally as the Commenter would have it but by a reall presenting that Person who in our stead did perform and suffer what was required of his mysticall Bodie Chapter XII The Godhead of Jesus Christ shewed by Scriptures Page 55 Propheticall and Evangelicall by the Type of the Tabernacle which was as a visible habitation of God representing the Body of Christ How the Heathens immitated this by setting up visible images wherein they thought their God was resident Chapter XIII Reasons why the Jewish worship was confined to Page 58 the Tabernacle and Temple that these were Types of God to be Incarnate Why the People of God worshipped with their faces towards the Temple That the Church is more Ancient then the Temple That notwithstanding the Commenters cavill the Patriarches belived in the same Sonne of God that that we Christians do though the appellation Christ could not then be used Chapter XIV That the Christian when he prayeth prayeth to Page 61 God whom he considereth to be resident in Jesus Christ as in his Temple As the Israelites considered God resident in the Tabernacle and Temple and so prayed toward that place That God so intabernacled in the Body of Christ is the finall or ultimate Object of The Christians prayer and worship Chapter XV. How the onely and most high God became a Priest Page 65 and a Mediatour That Christ is prayed to and yet is a Mediatour How Christ is said to pray and yet is the supream God That every Person in the Trinitie may be prayed to Chapter XVI The Godhead of Christ shewed from the Adoration Page 68 of his Person that his Godhead is worshipped and not his Body alone considered without the Godhead That the Godhead united with a creature for so is the Body of Christ doth not hinder us from worshipping our God Of the worship of Jesus performed and yet without worshipping a creature Chapter XVII That the custome of bowing when the Name Page 71 Jesus is mentioned was appointed principally to set forth his Godhead and to keep Christians in a continuall Confession and memorie thereof being the main foundation of our Religion Chapter XVIII That Jesus Christ is Jehova Of the Name Page 74 Jesus that it is a proper Name of God No Person in the Trinitie hath any name proper but onely the Sonne Of divers appellative Names of God Chapter XIX An enquirie whether the pure Godhead considered Page 77. as not incarnate hath any proper Name The distinction of Names Proper and Appellative The opinion of Philo the Jew therein and of the Fathers that their judgement is That there is no proper Name of God but onely the Name Jesus The Authours submission hereof to the learned Reader Chapter XX. The Godhead of Christ shewed from his appellation Page 79 Jehova That no meere creature can be called Jehova The signification of that word The reverend esteem of it by the Ancients That by the word Tetragrammaton Jehova is meant both in Jewish and Christian Writers Chapter XXI The Conclusion of this second Booke with the Page 82 Authours resolute Confession of Jesus Christ to be the most High and the Onely Lord God The Table THE THIRD BOOK Containing an Assertion of the Incarnation of the most High and Onely God in the Person of Jesus Christ Chapter I. THe vindication of Eusebius against the Page 1 false aspersion of the Commenter That Eusebius consented to the Eternall Godhead of Christ and to the Article Homo-ousion His judgement con●erning Gods visible appearance to the Patriarches in the Person of the Sonne That the supream God appeared to Abraham in the Person of the Sonne The Vnitie of the Godhead in the Persons of the Father and the Son Chapter II. How in the Scriptures the most high God is said Page 6 to have been seen and yet that no man hath seen God and both very truely Two questions propounded concerning the visibilitie and invisibilitie of God Chapter III. The first question How God is invisible What Page 8 is meant by the Face of God some places of Scripture which seem Opposite are reconciled Chapter IV. More concerning the first question How God Page 10 hath been and may be seen What the word Angel signifieth Of the appearing of God by assuming a corporeall shape Of Gods walking in Paradise That the apparitions of God in corporeall shapes were but Preambles and Prefigurations of his Incarnation Chapter V. That the Incarnation of God was foreshewed in Page 13 words and by promises The meaning of the Image of God wherein Man was made The meaning of the oath under Abrahams thigh The mysterie of Abrahams entertaining God at meat and of Jacobs wrastling with God unfolded What is meant by the Back-parts of God A rejection of the errors of the Anthropomorphites and an Explication of the first Article of Englands Religion Chapter VI. The second question Why the Fathers said Page 16 that onely the Sonne was seen by the Patriarchs and not the Father seeing both persons are but one God An exception of the difference between seeing God in this life and in the other life Whether God in the Person of the Father was ever seen in an assumed shape the judgement of