Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	believe_v	faith_n	justification_n	2,857	5	9.3476	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86506	A vindication of baptizing beleevers infants. In some animadversions upon Mr. Tombes his Exercitations about infant baptisme; as also upon his Examen, as touching the antiquities and authors by him alledged or contradicted that concern the same. Humbly submitted to the judgement of all candid Christians, / by Nathanael Homes. Published according to order.	Homes, Nathanael, 1599-1678.	1646 (1646)	Wing H2578; Thomason E324_1; ESTC R200604	209,591	247

signifies more then lawfully used as a carnall man may use his meat and drinksoberly and for a good end to fit him for his calling namely it signifies thus much That meats c. not prohibited are sanctified by the Word allowing them to us and giving us believing in that Word a right to them in Christ and by the prayer of faith we sue out a blessing upon them But Mr. T. Objects That it is not said 1 Cor. 7.14 The unbeleeving husband is sanctified in or by the beleeving wife but in or by the wife Nor is it said that the unbeleeving wife is sanctified in or by the beleeving husband but in or by the husband the Apostle purposely so speaking that the reason of sanctification may be intimated to be taken not from the faith of the yoak-fellow but from conjugall relation Answ The Syr. Text prevents all imagination of this conceit reading the Text according to the true meaning thus That husband which is not a beleever is sanctified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the wife 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a beleever And that wife which is not a beleever is sanctified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the husband 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a beleever 2. There are two Greek Coppies that Beza saw have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the beleeving wife And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Mr. Tombes not forgetting should not slight 3. Hear reason The Apostles purpose sure enough is to comfort beleevers married with unbeleevers And it is as sure that the Apostle layes the ground of that comfort of the beleeving husband in his condition of husband as oppositely distinguished from his unbeleeving wife and the comfort of the beleeving wife in her condition of wife as oppositely distinguished from her unbeleeving husband For saithe he the unbeleeving husband is sanctified in the wife What wife What can we answer but the beleiving wife And so of the husband Now seeing the Apostle layes it in a proper peculiar priviledge which is sometimes in the husband to wit when he is a beleever and the wife not And sometimes in the wife when she is a beleever and the husband not It must needs be that the foundation of the comfort intended by the Apostle is layd in faith peculiar but to one of the couple and not in marriage that was equally common to both And that faith doth rather sanctifie marriage then marriage sanctifie the married persons A harsh phrase for a Christian That civill marriage is a sanctifier either to sanctifie two unbeleevers which by Mr. T. his consequence it must or to more-sanctifie a condition to one that is a beleever But Mr T. observes further That ' E● is not rightly rendred by in the old Latine and our new English Translation as if the faith of the wife were the cause of sanctifying the unbeleeving husband For no man will say the faith of the beleeving wife sanctifies the unbeleeving husband federally so that the unbeleeving husband should be capable of Baptisme by his wives faith which yet by the good leave of such men be it said doth as well follow from this place as that the son is federally holy and capable of Baptisme for the faith of the parent Neither can it be said that the Parent is sanctified with spirituall sanctification by the faith of the wife We Answ To render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by is tolerable seeing the Apostles do very oft Hebraize and make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to answer to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebrew which oft signifies by * Sanctificat●●● est vir qui infidelis est in uxore fideli i●●● est per. Hebraismus Sanctificataesi mulier quae estinfidelis in viro fideli id est per. Hebraismus So Tremelius in his Translation of and Notes upon the Sy● But we regard not whether it be rendred by or in that is in or through the beleiver his faith the unbeleiver is sanctified to him still it will stand good that faith may as well be the instrumentall cause of a lesser thing namely of sanctifying an unbeleeving husband to a beleeving wifes use as it is an instrumentall cause of a greater thing namely of justification Rom. 5.1 And every one may boldly say that the faith of the beleiving wife sanctifies the unbeleeving husband federally in this sence to wit as all outward things that have no holinesse in them meat drink cloaths carnall friends c. may be called federally holy to a beleever that is that they are and shall be for a beleevers good and comfortable use by reason of the Covenant she is in with God though her faith cannot sanctifie her unbeleeving husband federally for the Sacrament of Baptisme 1. Because the line of the Covenant runs not To thee beleeving Woman and thy husband or To thee beleeving husband and to thy Wife But to thee beleeving parent and thy seed 2. Because whiles the woman is a beleiver the husband is said here to be a known unbeleever And whiles the husband is a beleiver the wife is said to be a known unbeleiver according to this 1 Cor. 7.14 And all unbeleevers known to be such by apparent Scriptures are not to be accounted federally holy so as to belong to the Seal of the Covenant 3. Mr Tombes affirmes after that the unbeleeving husband is sanctified TO the beleeving wife The sanctification is not to her as the Covenant of the father is to the Infant but to her the beleever Which three Reasons makes me look on Mr. Tombes his comparison as a very strange one as if not well weighed before it was uttered viz. That it doth as well follow saith Mr Tombes from this place that the unbeleeving husband is federally holy so as to be capable of Baptisme by the beleeving wives faith as that the son is federally holy and capable of Baptisme for the faith of the Parent But let the candid Reader look back on what we have sayd on this 1 Cor. 7. or look forward to the Scriptures and judge whether this be not a very uneven comparison It is further objected by Mr T. that in this 1 Cor. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 IN THE WIFE is more rightly rendred in Latine in the Dative as TO THE WIFE But we aske Mr Tombes in what latin is it so rendred Not in the old lat that is by Not in Vatabl that is also By. Not in Beza that is in Not in the Syr. that is also by If you mean is to be rendred or may or might be rendred better in the Dative TO for which you bring seven instances 1 We answer that those instances may be tolerably at least rendred in the ablative notion IN according to the note there of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In. As Gal. 1.16 To reveal his sonne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 IN MEE that is not onely by the sound of the word to mee but by his spirit and the graces thereof and the effectuall