Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	place_n	scripture_n	true_a	4,433	5	4.8987	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A29535	Seasonable reflections on a late pamphlet entituled A history of passive obedience since the Reformation wherein the true notion of passive obedience is settled and secured from the malicious interpretations of ill-designing men.	Bainbrigg, Thomas, 1636-1703.	1690 (1690)	Wing B474; ESTC R10695	44,461	69

likely that I am for King William and think him as truly and as much King as ever King James was We do not stand in the same light we do not think of the same things and so we differ And had we lived in many other Periods of time it is very likely that we might have differed too Had we lived when Saul was made King over Israel I know not but he might have been against him and I for him At Saul's death it is probable that he might have been for Saul's Son Ishbosheth and I for David At David's death he might have been for Adonijah and I for Solomon For Adonijahs Appearances are very taking he was the eldest Son then living of King David he was a goodly Personage and his Fathers Darling 1 Kings 1 6. Yet my Solomon reigned and the People obeyed with a very good Conscience and that though he himself was somewhat suspitious of his Title for he did not trust to his Anointing by King David's order but got himself to be made King a second time 1 Chron. 29. 22. But to go on Let us pass over the instances of Rehoboam and Jeroboam of Zimri and Omri and many others who gave occasions to like difficulties Suppose we had lived in the days when Jehu took possession of the Kingdom of Israel it is very possible that he might have been for Joram or Joram's Son or some of the Family of Ahab and it is as possible that I might have been for Jehu he for a King according to the modern Phrase de jure and I for a King de jure and de facto too For he was a Conqueror tho' not of the People neither he nor they ever thought so yet of the King he was and so if the Cause of the War was just his Title was certainly good Some think he was a Rebel I am not concerned to dispute that Point but if he were he came to the Throne in the same way that Jeroboam did who was the first beginner of that Kingdom and so could transmit to his Successors no more Title to the Regal Dignity than he had himself Be that as it will let my Adversary be for Joram or Joram's Son and I for Jehu he has the Point of Loyalty to a late King on his side and I the Point of Loyalty to my God on my side both great Pleas. But at such a time mine seems at least to me to be the better because there is something in Religion that tyes me faster to my God than any thing else can tye another to his Prince Now if an Ahab or a Joram will not only be disloyal to their God but require me and use all the Tricks and Slights in the World to gain me and the rest of the People to a like Disloyalty if he will daringly and boldly trample upon the Religion established by Law if he will require absolute Obedience and Obedience without Reserve and make his Will the Law and me without Law or pretence to Law his Slave Why must I in such a Case as this be against my God and against my self for one who has the Name of King but has thrown away from him all that which should and all that which can speak him in the Exercise of true Kingly Power over Israel I cannot tell but some may think me in the wrong for declaring to be for God and Jehu against Baal and Joram but if I am I may be rectified by being informed that either now there is or ever was such a man who could perswade himself that any one true Servant of the God of Israel in those days did not heartily close in with Jehu and submit to his Government or that any Worshipper of Baal who was so in reality did do it and then there could be no Grumbletonians in those days except the Halters those that were betwixt God and Baal and could be very indifferent whether they worshipped the one or the other Thus we must see that the things which are have been of old there are difficulties in human Affairs and men have had great Grounds to differ about the Subject of Regal Power and so about the Object of Non-resistance and that not only in Israel but as might be easily shewn among the Assyrians Persians Romans Britains English and very much in this Nation since the Norman Conquest Now this difficulty may be an Argument to move Men not to be over-positive in determining that Damnation in the strict sense shall be the Portion either of the one or the other in case he acts sincerely according to his best knowledge whether he stands up for his King or his God whether he stands to Defend a former King in the Rights he had or another who takes possession upon the supposition of a Desertion or a Conquest Whether he be willing to have continued or to have been made a Slave and lose his civil Rights and the Exercise of the true Religion or whether he had rather to have been made free and so let easily into his Rights by the Assistance of another who might justly do it and if he would might have left 'em in full enjoyment of their folly and misery Thirdly As to the Punishment here denounced by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Damnation whether nothing less can or ought to be understood by it but downright Hell or Eternity of Torments Here many things ought to be well weighed before we determin positively in so great a point As 1. That all Men agree that there are different Senses of this Word in Scripture 2. Commentators do much differ and contend about the true meaning of it in this place And tho' Dr. Hammond be resolute in this assertion yet by the multitude of Objections which in his Notes he labours to answer he shews that his Opinion was neither general nor clear 3. That as the Commentators differ so the interpreters seem somewhat to differ too For what is in King James's Translation shall receive to themselves Damnation is in the Bishops Bible Translated in Queen Elizabeth's time shall receive to themselves Judgment Some may think that both these words signify the same But if they cast an Eye upon another Text Rom. 5. 16. they will hardly do it for these we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that is rendred in the Bishops Translation for the fault came unto Condemnation but in King James's it is for the Judgment was to Condemnation Fault or Judgment here is not the same with Damnation or Condemnation but that which leads to it And if we look into 1 Tim. 5. 12. it will be worthy of a little remark That tho' the Translators differ in the former places yet they intirely agree to render here the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Damnation but if you look into St. Chrysostome and most of the old Writers and Dr. Hammond himself you will find that Hell-punishment is by no means to be understood in that Text.

ought they to suffer if they did obey But because they will not obey their Prince he punishes and they suffer The Prince therefore in this case has no manner of Obedience But let us consider further tho we cannot barter with a Prince and give him Suffering instead of Doing yet we may be obliged to suffer and we may obey in doing and obey in suffering for so doing and that Obedience may be called Passive Obedience tho in truth and reality all the Obedience which we perform in this case is Active For we obey one and suffer from another we obey God and suffer from Man or we obey Man and suffer from God But because God hath commanded us not only to do our Duties but likewise has commanded us in certain cases not only to do but to be ready to suffer for so doing our obedience to this Command of suffering has been called by some Passive Obedience Now this is Great and Noble and speaks an excellency of Spirit which is most admirable for Men to do well and to continue in so doing whatever they suffer upon that account But as it is Noble so it is hard and difficult It is hard to be bound to confess Christ before Men that we may gain Heaven and at the same time to be forced to lose all that we have on Earth for so confessing This sets Body and Soul at variance nay the Soul is confounded in it self whilst hopes and fears engage one another in a severe conflict the one would gain and the other would not lose the one pulls upwards and the other downwards upon this account the thing is difficult But yet we must remember that for all the difficulty it is very practicable because it has been always required and always expected No Philosopher would ever allow him to be a good Man who would flinch from his Duty upon the account of suffering To do so they say is slavish and it is one of the Rules of the Pythagoreans that in the exercise of Vertue a Man must have nothing of the Slave in him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he must have no regard for any thing but his Duty Hierocles p. 209. Tully in the 2d of his Offices will not allow it possible for a Man to be just or honest or good who fears either poverty or pain or banishment or death it self so as to be warped from right by the fears of them or by the hopes of any advantages that are contrary to them Horace that very easie Man who can never be thought by a Heathen to be an over-severe directer of Conscience expects from his just and good Man that he should bear up against Tyrant and Rabble and suffer all that their rage and fury can throw upon him and yet not veer in the least from his point but go on in his Duty steddily and firmly Justum tenacem propositi virum Non civium ardor prava jubentium Non vultus instantis Tyranni Mente quatit solidâ This Principle of suffering in a good Cause for the sake of Vertue Goodness and Righteousness or of doing our Duties notwithstanding that we must suffer lies so open and clear to the reason of mankind that Men of worth and honour in every Age could not fail to practise it And we Christians are bound to the observance of this Duty as others were before by the reason of the thing as well as by precepts of Christianity Whatever principle a Man has and whatever he accounts a Duty if he will be true and faithful just and upright it may sometime or other bring him under suffering and he must be content with it because it is base and unworthy in certain cases not to do it it is a betraying of our Consciences a forfeiture of all the good opinion that we can have of our selves Now if this be true and this be called Passive Obedience that must not be looked upon as a peculiar of Christianity or a new Doctrine introduced since our Saviour's days much less can any particular Church appropriate the Rule to it self because it lies in common to all mankind and has sometimes been practised by the little as well as by the great Some perhaps may have just cause to complain of false Casuists and base corrupters of the genuine sense of right Reason and true Christianity but when they have done it they have onely reproved a gross fault they must not expect any great honour for having had a right notion of a plain Truth If we would speak clearly we must confess that our blessed Lord has not heightened this Duty for he can expect no more sufferings than what Pain and Beggery and Death signifie but as a most gracious and tender Master he has made all these much more easie and portable than ever they were before and that in several ways As first by giving us most gracious Promises of Reward in another World in case we are called to suffer Matth. 5. 9 10 11. Secondly By assuring us that assistances of God's grace come in to our help whenever we do suffer Matth. 10. 18 19 Phil. 1. 29. Thirdly By giving us such thoughts of God as are most powerful to support us under all sufferings For what can dismay him that will think with S. Peter that he who suffers as a Christian or suffers according to the Will of God he may commit the keeping of his Soul to God in well doing as unto a faithful Creator 1 Pet. 4. 16 19. These things are beyond Philosophy and they are mighty supports to all Christians who must suffer for well doing These would acquit the justice of God if he had required sufferings as sufferings and made them so necessary means of Salvation that he would accept of none into Heaven but such as came thither as Martyrs through a flaming fire or a Sea of bloud But God is not so fond of suffering as to require them for their own sakes We are not bound like Baal's Priests to cut and flash our selves that we may please our God We are not bound to move others to cut our Throats or to threaten to kill them if they won't kill us as S. Augustine tells the Circumcellions did We ought not to give advantages and opportunities to wicked Men to execute their wicked purposes upon us In times of Persecution we are not bound to go out of our Houses and provoke an inraged multitude to throw us in the Fires or to the Lions This rashness has been condemned by whole Councils though at some time we may and must leave Father and Mother and House and Land and Life it self for Christ's sake and for the Gospels yet at other times we may keep them as well Tho the first Christians Acts 5. 41. did rejoice that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for Christs Name and as it is Heb. 10. 34. they took joyfully the spoiling of their goods Yet they did as much rejoice and gave hearty thanks