Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	apostle_n	church_n	word_n	1,489	5	3.9514	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45406	A continuation of the defence of Hvgo Grotivs, in an answer to the review of his annotations whereto is subjoyned a reply to some passages of the reviewer in his late book of schisme, concerning his charge of corruptions in the primitive church, and some other particulars / by H. Hammond ...	Hammond, Henry, 1605-1660.	1657 (1657)	Wing H529; ESTC R17947	36,523	52

view 1. of my answer 2. of the words of the testimony it self on which it was clearly grounded 3. of that which is here objected against the fitness of my answer 4. For the first It must be remembred as the original of this debate what from this testimony of Hegesippus he had a formerly concluded viz. the corruption of the Church as to doctrine immediately after the Apostles fell asleep whereof saith he whosoever will impartially search into the writings that of those dayes do remain will perhaps find more cause to complain thou is commonly imagined 5. To which my answer was b that all that Hegesippus there saith is onely this that the poyson of the heretical or Apostatical or Atheistical Gnosticks in express words the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the sect of the Gnosticks falsly so called and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the Atheistical seducers did openly set up against the truth of Christ as soon as ever the Apostles were dead which being by Hegesippus terminated in the known despisers and persecutors of the true Church and Orthodox professors the grievous Wolves that worried the flock and those constantly resisted and combated with preacht against and written against by the Fathers and ancient writers and never observed by any man to have gained of them or infused any the least degree of their poyson into them or their writings that are come to us 'T is a sad condition that the just and unjust the false teachers and Orthodox professors should fall under the same envy that the shepherds which oft laid down their lives for their sheep should be defamed aend again martyred by us their unkind posterity under pretence that they were in conspiracy with the wolves also 6. In this answer it is not possible I should be subject to any mistake if this one matter of fact be true that the Gnosticks and Atheistical seducers were the very persons of whom alone Hegesippus spake for that those were the wolves and that the Church-writers have constantly refuted and detested them and not suckt any of their poysonous doctrines from them is so evident that this author hath neither formerly nor now suggested the contrary And for this in the next place I appeal to the express words of Hegesippus there at large set down in Greek but here onely referred to and more briefly toucht on by this author 7. The words as far as this matter is concern'd in them I shall recite They are these Euseb. Eccl. Hist. l. 111. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} That there may be no place for doubt in this matter I shall now give the English Reader a full view of them thus But when the sacred quire of the Apostles had severally ended their lives and the generation of those that had been thought worthy to hear with their own cars the divine wisdome was now past then the rout or riotous convention of the Godless seduction or seducers {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} signifies a seditious assembling or military preparation of confederates or conspirators and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} deceit or seduction may be used for the men that deceive or seduce received its beginning by the cunning or deceit of false teachers who now that none of the Apostles were left avowed and openly attempted to preach or promulgate the science falsly so called in opposition to the preaching of the truth 8. What is here meant by the science falsly so called no man can be ignorant that hath compared that phrase used expresly by the Apostle 1 Tim. 6. 20. with the writings of the Primitive Fathers or but lightly considered the very nature of plain words The word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Gnosticks literally signifies knowing men so styled by themselves but upon no grounds of truth their doctrines being indeed directly opposed to the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and so {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} knowledg or science falsly so called This therefore must be the meaning of the Apostles words {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the oppositions of the science falsly so called i. e. the doctrines of the sect of the Gnosticks in direct opposition to the doctrine of the Apostles and consequently the same must be the importance of the like phrase in Hegesippus in consent with the Apostles dialect what the Apostle calls science falsly so called Hegesippus must be believed to mean by the very same words the science falsly so called i. e. the Gnosticks what the Apostle calls {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} oppositions or contradictings Hegesippus expresses by {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} opposite or contrary preaching and these phrases are both farther cleared by a passage in the ancient author {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. 6. which tels us of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the contradictory discourses of the dotage or folly or madness of Simon by contradictory discourses certainly meaning the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} oppositions and antipreaching and by the dotage or madness of Simon Magus the knowledge that he pretended to and his followers and which so puss them up in a mad conceit of it but was indeed nothing else but blasphemous folly far removed from all degree of true science 9. From this short representation of this plain matter of fact thus visible before our eyes I shall now suppose it cleare that it was not confidence of my abilities but a well grounded perswasion that he that cited these words in Greek understood the plain meaning of them upon which I built my hope that my answer to this passage of Hegesippus would approve it self to him For if the Gnosticks and none else were the men spoken of by Hegesippus then was there no place for exception against my answer and if Hegesippus expresse words might be believed thus it was And thus stands this matter betwixt me and my Reprover at this time I have laid it before him let himself now if he please be party witnesse and judge I cannot think it possible I should need other 10. But then in the third place he hath an objection against this sense which at least may have force against me For saith he if the person thus expounding this testimony i. e. I may be credited the Gnosticks were never more busie nor prevalent then in that time which alone is excepted from the evil here spoken of 11. To this I answer 1. that in case I had at several times spoken things incoherent or contradictory this would be no sufficient proof that what I now recited from Hegesippus's plain words was not contained in them But then 2. I have been far enough from having thus anywhere contradicted my self or what I affirme in this answer of mine nor if I may be allowed the confidence to