Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	effect_n	love_n	love_v	3,170	5	7.1590	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46640	Verus Patroclus, or, The weapons of Quakerism, the weakness of Quakerism being a discourse, wherein the choicest arguments for their chief tenets are enervat, and their best defences annihilat : several abominations, not heretofore so directly discovered, unmasked : with a digression explicative of the doctrine anent the necessity of the spirits operation, and an appendix, vindicating, Rom. 9. from the depravations of an Arminian / by William Jamison.	Jameson, William, fl. 1689-1720.	1689 (1689)	Wing J445; ESTC R2476	154,054	299

a desperate Cause he conceds all at length For if God hath disposed of the Eternal Estate of every one universal Election is a bottomless Fiction except his Patrons affirm That either all obtain Eternal Life or else that matters fall out otherwise than God hath disposed and determined concerning them 2ly Whatever he hath said relating to Gen. 25.23 For his Opinion before we refuted it before except he mean some other place beside this which he handleth this present Text. viz. Rom. 9. 3ly That their Eternal Estates are there spoken of is clear seing the Apostle without the least shadow of ambiguity speaks of the Children themselves and that the Election of the one and the Rejection of the other was antecedent to their doing good or evil And that this is spoken of the Children themselves in some respect he himself here asserteth Then I say If this be true their Eternal State must be here spoken of seing the Lord loved the Person of Iacob and hated the Person of Esau before they were born or had done either good or evil And that this Assertion may the more evidently appear viz. That God loved the Person of Jacob and hated the Person of Esau even before they were born I shall more particularly vindicat Mal. 1.2.3 from his depravations which follow in his next Objection and Answer thereto The first of which is That this place Mal. 1.2 3. cited here by the Apostle v. 13. to confirm that which he had said concerning Jacob and Esau in the former verses is not to be understood of their Persons but of their Seeds For then this place of Malachi should be adduced by the Apostle to no purpose seing he is here speaking of the Person of Iacob and Esau which to say is both blasphemous and absurd Moreover the Prophet Malachi clearly intimats That he is speaking of the Persons of Iacob and Esau at least rhat he is not speaking of their Seeds so as to exclude their Persons Was not Esau Jacob's brother which Phrase must be understood in the first place of Iacob Esau themselves and secondly of their Seeds Neither is the reason of this Arminian of any weight drawn f●om the words of the 3 verse And hath laid his Mountain waste to prove his point yea the very contrary follows from the words Thus I have hated Esau Therefore I have laid his Mountain waste for the Vastation of the Idumean Mountains is mentioned as the effect of divine hatred against the Person of Esau extending it self in a secondary manner to his Posterity Even as the love of God to Iacob did extend it self to his Posterity as is clear from Deut. 10.15 with many other places of Scripture Where it is evident that the love of God did principally and chiefly terminat upon the person of Iacob and secondarly on his Seed and off-spring Furthermore our exposition is clear from the very words of the Text it self For the good Condition or Freedom from Devastat●on in which then the Jews were is holden forth by the Prophet to be an Effect of the Love of God to Iacob extending it self to his posterity even as the Destruction of the Edomites was an Effect of his hatred of God to Esau. In a word the good Condition of the Israelites hath the same kind of Relation to the love of God towards Iacob which the Devastation of Edom hath to the hatred of God towards Esau But that the good Condition of the Children of Israel was the Effect of the free love of God to Jacob the Prophet there clearly intimateth and as we said before many other places assert Therefore the Devastation of Edom was the Effect of the hatred of God to Esau extending it selt to his wicked Posterity He sayeth moreover That the cause why God hated Esau's Posterity at that time is declared in the 4 v. In these words We are impoverished but will return c. In which words saith he Their Incorrigible wickedness is declared Reply That Edom was an incorrigible wicked people is true but nothing to his purpose For in this their Resolution considered in it self of which Resolution alone the Prophet speaketh and in reposing themselves in their own Lands there can no wickedness be shewed Hence we conclude with Junius that noble Interpreter of Scripture on the words That in this 4 v. is contained a Decument that God is about to confirm Israel now brought back from Captivity to defend the Land and to magnifie himself in all things but on the other hand that he was about to deprive the Idumeans whom he had Reprob●t of all power to return or rebuild their Common wealth tho they had endeavoured to do it Add to all this the body of Orthodox writers both Ancient and Modern approving our meaning of this place we shall name two But as Gylippus was to the Lacaedemonians they me accounted in stare omnium The one is Hierom among the Ancients upon the place who saith He doth not only say I loved Jacob before he was born but also I hated Esau before he was brought forth But I also have reserved my love and hatred for their Posterity The other is Luther De servo Arbitrio Cap 161 who sayes It is not therefore the temerity of the Idumeans which is reproved but the ingratitude of the Children of Israel who see not what God bestoweth upon them and of what he depriveth their Brethren the Idumites for no other cause but because he loved the one and hated the other In which place Luther largely demonstrats that the Prophet here speaks of these things which he did to Israel and Edom as the Effect of his eternal love and hatred in opposition to Erasmus who by special Command of the Pope did undertake the defence of the Pelagian Doctrine in his Diatribe de Libero Arbitrio Add to all these the History of Jacob and Esau as a good Commentarie on both places now in hand which declareth that Esau was a profane Person Heb 12.16 and elsewhere and that Jacob got grace and so was saved which is more than a demonstration that the Lord determined from all Eternity to save the one and passe by the other which is the thing we plead for That which he sayes in the fourth place is true but nothing to his purpose Seing the Question is whether or not the Apostle in this place handleth the matter of Eternal Election and Reprobation In the fifth place he taketh the place of the old Libertins who denyed that any godly man ought to be subject to any Magistrat tho never so just if he want true Grace by reason of which Doctrines huge Confusions were raised in Germany as also by Venner who with his Complices began to raise great Tumults in England while he minded to make this Doctrine of our Author practicable He goeth on to deprave the 14. and 15. verses The substance of what he saith we shall faithfully deliver in so far as he militats

and believe that there is a God which is of it self a good thought is common to devils To this Robert Barclay Vind pag 51. answers That once the Devils had this knowledge from a spiritual nature and tho they have fallen yet they mey retain the memory of it for that their Fall and mans is every way alike none will affirm But surely if he had not willfully closed his Eyes that he might not see the Truth he might have clearly perceived this to be a most pitiful prevarication for what tho the fall of Angels and the fall of Man were not in all respects alike can any man not altogether void of reason conclude thence that the thing which is common to devils with men can be supernatural or Grace in the one more than in the other Again Surely there is no reason in the world to say that the devils retain their Memory more than their understanding For certainly the understanding is altogether as essential if not more to the rational creature as the memory Moreover to say that the devils retained no knowledge of God but the bare remembrance that they had knowledge of God is compleatly to contradict the Apostle Iames asserting chap 1.19 that the devils believe that there is one God and tremble for to believe a thing in the judgement of all men presupposeth some knowledge thereof and can be no more called an Act of the memory than tasting can be called seeing which is performed by the Eye or Smelling that which is performed by the Ear. Again presupposing which is possible though not true that the Devils had no memory of their knowledge of God It is beyond all doubt that these active Sagacious and skilful Spirits in the works of Nature can easily conclud from these admirable Effects that there is a Supream Cause first beeing the Creator of all things Now to say that they can know that there is one God and conclud from the works of Creation and Providence that this God is most powerful most wise c. and yet to say that they have no principle of knowledge whereby they can know this is to assert that there is a Sream without a Source or a Tree without a Root or a Beam without the Sun. Lastly If the Devils have only the memory of their knowledge of God and yet believe that there is a God and tremble then we may infer that our first Parents before the promise of the Messiah was made unto them had no Divine Light or Seed left in them contrary to Robert Barclay's beleif Vind pag 49. Seing our first Parents might retain the memory of the knowledge of God they had but just now lost But it is needless to dwell upon such nonsensical absurdities for the Quaker may as well affirm that ● man may pay his debt and sustain himself with the memory of the money he once had as that the Devils can know so much of God as without doubt they know by the alone memory of the knowledge they once had 14ly Fifthly That which will accompany the wicked to Hell cannot be called Grace Divine or any thing Supernatural but some relicts of the knowledge of God will accompany the wicked to Hell Therefore these cannot be called Grace D●●vine or any thing Supernatural The Major i● beyond all controversie The Minor is also mos● evident for otherwayes the never-dying-worm could not feed upon them whose torment consists most in the extremly bitter and sad reflection upon and consideration of the various Attributes of God with reference to themselves Exem gra from the consideration of his immutable Justice and infinite Power they conclude the impossibility of their releif But we need not insist on this seing none that read Luk 16. can be ignorant that these Souls have some knowledge of God except either willfull prejudice or some thing of that kind hath already preoccupied their minds 15ly Sixthly That men have naturally some relicts of the Image of God and can do some things contained in the Law of God we most firmly conclude from that express T●x Rom 2.14 the Gentiles that have not the Law do by nature the things contained in the Law. The Quakers and amongst others Rob Barclay in his Apology ●lately contradicting the Text Alledgeth that man naturally can know or do nothing contained in the Law of God because v 15. these Gentiles of whom this is spoken are said to have the Law written in their hearts which writing of the Law in mens hearts is elsewhere in Scripture counted a part of the new Covenant But this reason M● Brown chap 5. n. 24. hath fully e●ervat shewing by many demonstrations that the writing of the Law in the heart cannot at all be taken in this place for any part of the New Covenant the removal of which arguments the Quaker not so much as attempteth yet can impudently publish a lie to the world that he hath vindicat his Apologie Yea in stead of answering the Arguments he confirmeth what his Adversary sayeth and contradicteth himself For Vind pag 51. He granteth that men by Nature or Natural Light have knowledge of Politicks and the prudent management of worldly affairs and other things of that kind Hence I conclude that even according to the Quaker himself a man may be said to have the Law of God written in his heart and yet have no new Covenant Dispensation Seeing the second table of the Law which is a Rule for Politicks and prudent Administration of worldly affairs is the Law of God as well as the first The Quaker added a second reason in his Apologie to prove that by NATVRE in this place is not to be understood the corrupt nature of man viz because then the Apostle should contradict himself who saith 1 Cor. 2.14 that the natural man cannot know the things of God amongst which things of God the Law must be accounted which Rom. 7.12 Is called Holy Iust and good which contradiction Mr. Broun utterly denyed to follow upon our exposition of this place shewing at large Num. 25. the compleat harmony of these places notwithstanding of our exposition to which the Quaker thinks it enough to reply that the meaning given by Mr Broun to the Text in hand cannot be reconciled with what the Apostle sayeth 1 Cor 2.14 unless upon some supposition but what that is he telleth us not above by him denyed Now Reader had this man a respect either to Cause or Credit who thought to cheat the world with such pitiful nothings as these For this was one of his Apologetick arguments whereby to overthrow the common Exposition of this Text to establish the gloss put upon it by the Socinians whom he never leaveth to follow and instead of urging this Argument taketh the part of the defendant and so giveth up the cause for his answer ridiculously supposeth that we urge this place 1 Cor. 2.14 as an Argument against us which they urge as an Argument against us And

and the whole is greater than the part and all that is deduced therefrom the Knowledge of the things of God but these Evasions are as easily everted as invented for who can deny that by the same species or kind of Knowledge and reason whereby man can deduce excellent politick and Oeconomick Conclusions and order a Common-wealth or Family he can also conclude from the beautiful Fabrick and comely order of Heaven and Earth and the admirable Providence of God apparent therein that there is a first and supreme Power from which these things did proceed and by which they are guided into their proper ends And indeed in this did consist the wisdom of the wise Heathens as is evident to any that have but the least acquaintance with the writings of Plato Aristotle and such other heathnish Philosophers to whom the invisible things of God even his eternal Power and God-head were made manifest by the things that are made being by them ponderated and contemplated Rom. 1.20 Certain it is that it is as easy by the same kind of Knowledge and Reason to know that every effect hath a cause as to know that the whole is greater than a part But the Quaker granteth that by natural light only a man may know this latter Axiom with whatsoever can be deduced from it Ergo he may as easily know the former with whatsoever may be deduced from it but from this former Axiom the natural Philosophers firmly conclude that there is a Supreme Cause Ergo a man having natural Light only may conclude from this Axiom which is imprinted on the hearts of all men that there is a supreme Cause or Author of all things which is God. Moreover it is certain that the defect of the Wisdom of the Heathens is every where by Scripture placed in this that by it they could not perceive Christ and the Mysteries of the Gospel which as they were to the Iews a stumbling Block so they were to the wise Greeks foolishness and no where in this that they could not so much as know that there is an Omnipotent and Just God which ought to be reverenced and served though with what kind of Worship they knew not and that we ought to do unto another as we would he should do to us Again that a Brute hath more knowledge in Politicques or Oeconomicks than it hath in Mechanicks or Arithmetick is false and ridiculous for indeed they have alike in both for if the Bee can imitate the Politician or the Governour of a Family she can also be the ape of the Mechanick and prettily imitate him in making Cells to contain honey the hen also when she hatcheth or hath brought forth can perceive if any be wanting of her Eggs or Birds Hence I may conclude that the Hen is as skilful in Arithmetick as the Bee is in policie the hungry dog also will be very loath to part with any piece of the Morsel he hath gotten into his clutches Hence I may as well conclude that a dog understandeth that Axiom viz. that the whole is greater than the part as the Bee or Ant understand the Fundamentals of policie and Oeconomie But it is needlesse to dwell any longer in the refu●ation of these things which are no lesse unreasonable than impious 17●y Our eight Argument we draw from Rom. 1.19 20. Because that which may be known of God is c. from which place our Divines have alwayes concluded against the Socinians see Pareus on chap. 1. to the Romans dub 16. and why may not we with as good Reason against the Quakers infer That there are some reliques of the Divine Image or Natural Knowledge of God left in man against which inference Robert Barclay pag. 52. saith that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is to be known of God is not understood any thing which man retained in the fall but a new visitation of Light and Grace And 2 dly that tho this Knowledge of God be common to all men yet they receive it only by this new visitation of Grace and Light But to answer at this rate is only loudly confidently to proclaim that his Doctrine is pure Paganism for who that ever thought there was any Necessity of the Christian Religion in order to Salvation wou●d dare to affirm that what was common to the Heathens yea devils also was as really saving the fruit of Christs purchase as that which is proper to the godly For surely this kind of Knowledge of God of which the Apostle here speaketh and sayeth that it is learned by the contemplation of the Creatures is common not only to all the Heathens but even to the Devils themselves I hope we have by this time sufficiently demonstrated that there are some reliques of the knowledge of God and something of the principles of Morality remaining in man even considered in his lapsed Condition We have also vindicated so many of Mr. Browns Arguments as the Quaker thinks fit to take notice of many others he hath left untouched see for Examples sake chap. 5. num 28 29 30. But indeed the Quaker here as he doth all along playeth like the Dog in Nile making a mint and then to his heels again for he either leaves the Arguments and Proofs of his Adversary as also his answers given to his Arguments altogether untouched or else opposeth such pitiful Trifles as being examined and pressed instantly resolve in the apples of Sodom and yet certainly here if ever the Quaker was concerned to have played the man and given sufficient ground for this Doctrine For with this light all the Quakers Religion standeth and falleth which indeed is nothing but the meer Remainders and small spunks of that sometimes bright Image that shined in our first Parents which altho they can never be quenched yet are never alike or sufficient to reveal these Mysteries The knowledge of which is absolutly necessar to Salvation or to lead man through the dark and dangerous Wilderness of this World into the more excellent Canaan of eternal rest And therefore there is no Light common to mankind sufficient for Salvation seing all men have no other Light common to them but this which we have evinced to be altogether natural and yet this natural Light is to the Quakers their God their Christ their Grace their Scriptures and whatsoever else is necessary to Salvation That it is to them their Rule or in stead of the Scriptures we have seen already and that this Light also is to them in stead of God and Christ or that in their account this Light of reason and Conscience for no other is common to all men is God himself these following passages evince In him was Life and the Life was the Light of men If the Life be the Divine Essence the Light must be so also for such as the Cause is such the Effect must be Thus George Whitehead in a Manuscript cited by Hicks Quaker Appeal answered pag 4. and Will

against our Confession Having inferred from these verses by way of an Objection to himself That it seems there are some to whom God will not shew mercy He answers That the Apostle pre-occupies an Objection which some might make out of the Continuance of Gods Mercy still to the Children of Israel but withdrawn from Edom as before What shall we say is there unrighteousness with God Next that Exod. 33 19. here cited by the Apostle speaks not of Gods first Grace which he gives to all alike but of the second which he continueth to these that walk humbly and answerably to the first as Moses had done To which I reply 1. That he makes his Objection pre-occupied by the Apostle to be no Objection For from the Lords continuance of his Mercy upon the Humble-walking under it and his withdrawing the same from Esau upon the abuse thereof none could infer with any colour of reason That there is unrighteousness with God seing the abuse of good things deserveth the Depravation thereof And so according to him the Apostle was triffling all the while Again any that runneth not into willful prejudice may see that the Apostles objection hath more apparent Strength in the judgement of Humane Reason by far than our Author maketh it to have for it is an inference drawn from what the Apostle had said in the former verse of the absolute rejection of some while others were Elected which Doctrine carnal reason as it doth yet knew too well how to wrest And from this Doctrine according to carnal Reason no little absurdity seemed to follow Wherefore the Apostle appeals from its Tribunal to that of the Scriptures yea even to such a Text as speaketh of the absolute Dominion of God over the Creature Yea the most absolute imaginable Now if the objection had been such an one as this Arminian professeth it there had been no necessity of the Apostles betaking himself to this place of Scripture 2. What he talketh here of his twofold grace stands and falls with what he said of his twofold Election which distinction we have already rejected for this Distinction of Grace in first and second it is groundless for it is not in the least insinuated in this Text viz. Exod 33 19. That Moses had gotten in the beginning from God some kind of Grace which had not the Divine power of God coming along therewith causing Moses irresistibly yet sweetly walk in Gods Statutes But leaving him to use well or abuse the grace gotten Now he must prove this from the Text if he would conclude any thing from it moreover If Moses speak only of a second grace here which a first must in Faith and humble walking necessarily preceed then this Text holds forth the Dominion of God to be no more absolute over his Creatures than that of a Magistrate towards his well or ill deserving subjects whom he ought to reward or punish according to their desert and not to whom he will only And so this Text shall destroy it self Lastly if the exposition of this universalist were sound then the Apostles Conclusion which he gathereth in the next verse should not follow but rather the quite contrary thereof For if God give a first grace to all and that so sufficient that it lyes only in Mans will to come or not to come unto God and that Man hath power either to will or nill at pleasure either to turn or not to turn to God and yet notwithstanding some come and some come not then all that makes the one to differ from the other is certainly of him that willeth The Answer of our Antagonist to this 16. verse is rare viz. Tho our Salvation be meer of Mercy yet Man can both will and run in some sort as this Scripture imports because he could have said nothing less to to the purpose For the Argument which may be framed from this verse and it is not of him that willeth Ergo Election or the purpose of God one of which words must of necessity be supplyed from verse 11. Otherwise the Apostles words would want a cohesion and the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which of necessity must be understood here shall want a Noun is not an effect of the will of Man or of his good works moving God thereunto Now this Argument is not touched by the answer as is of it self apparent He therefore here delivereth up the cause and endeavoureth to cheat his Reader 2. This place imports no more a power in all men to will or run in the way of Gods Commandments than these words in Ezek. 36.22 32. Not for your sake and leave in all Men a power to merit at the hand of God. He goeth on to comment upon the 17. and 18. verses And 1. He desires us To note that here the Lord doth not say for this purpose I have created thee but raised thee up or brought thee upon the Stage But this is the vainest of evasions for none but an Athiest can deny that God from all Eternitie did decree to raise up Pharaoh for that same end for which in time he raised him up and consequently that he decreed to create him for the same end otherwise God failed of his first end and was forced to betake himself to the next best Which to affirm is to make God a Man and so to profess atheism with open face yea this Doctrine bringeth the wisdom of God below that of a Man seing according to it the omniscient God did creat Pharaoh for an end which he knew he was never to obtain But 2. That Pharaoh was not only brought on the Stage but also created to the end that God might manifest His Power and Justice in His Destruction is clear from Pro 16.4 Where it is said that God made wrought formed or created for all these will the word Pagnal bear all things for Himself yea even the wicked the Spirit of God holding forth that this is a Paradox unto the day of evil 2. He sayes That Pharaoh was known unto the Lord to be a proud and obstinate Rebell as is evident Exod 8.2 But what he would hence inferr is not evident except that Pharaoh's ill disposed will was unconquerable by the grace and power of the omnipotent God To repeat which Conclusion is more than to refute it That which he sayes in the third place viz. That God shewed Pharaoh the danger of disobedience before he sent his Plagues upon Him As also his fourth observation viz. that he makes him of unwilling willing to let his People go is meer nothing For himself here on the matter grants That from Gods Exalting Pharaoh to the Throne of the Kingdom He was destinat to destruction and his day of grace gone otherwise his first note upon this Text is nonsense Therefore it follows That all the warnings antecedent to the Plagues are not Declarations of the mind of God to save Pharaoh And that his causing of him to let the people